here here! fuck that site!

*Hear, hear! Fuck that site!

Seconded.

Thirded

Motion passed!

Order in the court! Orderrrrrr!!!!!

I’d say keep it around as comedy. That shape shifting article is hilarious!

and neonnnettle, and sorcha faal for that matter! all the same!

YNW and NN are even worse than Such A Fail, which seems impossible yet is true. If I recall, Faal has actually been right once or twice. And I hate Faal very much.

I know you're just exagerating for effect, but these websites and even Such A Fail report correct things sometimes. I would be all for banning them completely from the sub if I thought there would be no slippery slope. Convince me. You'd need extremely detailed lines drawn between "fake news" and independent media that gets things wrong sometimes. Even the mainstream media gets things wrong sometimes. Huge list with examples of false reporting coming from the major media networks. CNN, Washington Post, Fox News, New York Times, Guardian, NBC, ABC, etc.

I also have an issue with OP's claim:

Every time someone posts a link to that repugnant website, they make money. They make an unimaginable amount of money every day.

What is an "unimaginable amount of money?" A million dollars a day? Couldn't they provide a source? Why leave it out? If there's no source, then this post is fake news.

well said. damn you got downvoted.....

This sub never used to be like this. There are users in here saying they totally trust CNN. Somehow "they" convinced half of this sub to distrust alternative media just because some specific websites are "fake news." Some alternative media is fake news, therefore all alternative media is fake news. In the meantime, they dont like being told that false stories routinely happen on mainstream media.

I totally trust CNN more than the random alternative news site these days. On the vast majority of alt news, I see no drive to maintain a good reputation or correct their errors...just to lure in suckers who want a story they can feel good about.

You're looking at the wrong alternative media. You can start off with these first:

The Intercept

The Real News Network

Can you tell me which alternative media sites you have analyzed?

Well, I found this pretty thorough analysis of this "Real News Network" which makes me not want to waste further time on it: https://www.newsbud.com/2012/11/08/the-real-news-vs-the-real-truth/

Have any better ones?

LOL

You're one of the better trolls out there. Almost had me. You claim to trust CNN more than alternative news, and to prove your claim that the Real News isn't the best, you use an alternative media outlet's article on the drama they have with the Real News. 9/10

Clickbait sites with tons of intrusive advertisng like the examples on OPs post make momey by getting eyeballs on pages. The more popular content is on a given page, the more people view it, and so all those crappy clickbait adds plastered everywhere start to add up.

Dont forget the anti media

I wrote like 500 articles with the Anti Media back when they were more fearless, ain't a damn thing fake about the Anti Media... we got this story of police murder that no one had ever heard about 2 million views in 2014. We did a lot. http://theantimedia.org/mother-calls-police-to-help-her-son-take-his-medicine/

Sorcha Faal's a fake name, right? I didn't know if "they'd" stopped writing by now

Sorcha Faal at least has relevant news stories in there articles, they tend to weave them into whatever disinformation they are trying to push at the time. neon nettle and yournewswire are basically a fake news generator bot.

Ban all the things! Good god almighty.

Sorcha faal is the ONLY website that showed Obama's love child, and the mother getting shit by the secret service while trying to confront him. She was a dental assistant that worked on Obama's teeth. This one certainly was real. The kid is in limbo and the ladies family wants him.

Sorcha faal has a lot of bs but some state level intel agency feeds him stuff occasionally.

If anyone's feeding him anything, it's disinformation. Why do you think they got this one thing right about Obama?

Sorcha faal is the ONLY website that showed Obama's love child, and the mother getting shot dead by the secret service while trying to confront him.

Maybe because it was 100% fabricated? Genuinely curious: what was so convincing about this particular story for you?

They had her pics linked directly from the dentist's website. Same lady. She has the connection to the president. That's confirmed.

The dentist was a navy guy. Confirmed that he is the go-to dentist for the president, when the president is in the area. They have military dentist's in each region on standby for this.

Linked to news showing Obama went in for tooth work there at the right time.

The lady went to the white House and tried to breach it for unknown reasons. Dental assistant just flips one day and tried to contact Obama forcefully and brings her kid with her?

There was some analysis of the car chase, shooting, that argued that they wanted to kill her and couldve handled it differently. This is not too convincing, ymmv.

The day she did it was significant but I can't remember why sorry.

Kid was taken from her. Linked to news interviews of her family wanting to know why they are not being given the kid. This is very very odd. Kid should obviously have been given to gmother or sister within days. There's no explanation for this that makes sense. Kid fell into a gov. Black hole.

She told someone that the baby's daddy was a vip i think. (,I haven't read the article in years, not sure of every detail sorry. I'll find a link and post it in edit )

The whole timeline fits. (meet at dental visit, sex, 9 months for baby, etc.)

If sorchas source really is FSB. I'd imagine they'd be watching Obama, maybe caught him in a secret tryst, maybe one if thier spies heard Washington whispers about it. And they fed it to sorcha.

Why do you think it was 100% fabricated? How would you explain her behavior? How did sorcha put it all together if it was fiction? It seems like that would be a hard fit to come in with a story that matches reality like this. Like, why did she do it? Why won't they give up the kid? Lucky for sorcha that he uncovered the Navy dentist isn't it? Is it odd that she worked on the president, then later tries to the point of dying to get into the white house like a psycho with something to prove?

Then again, maybe Obama's CIA handlers made this up to perpetuate the cover story that Obama is straight!

She was fired from her job for unknown reasons after the Obama visit. Was it for in appropriate contact with a patient?

That right there is the massive leap that all else relies on, and there is zero evidence to suggest that it's remotely accurate.

No. None of it relies on that.

I just asked an obvious question. It's one data point of many

If she still worked there till that fateful day, the story doesn't substantially change.

The entire narrative you're discussing relies on her being impregnated by the president. There is nothing to support that.

That leap, that speculation, is the thing that all the other bullet points come together to tie it into that narrative to make sense.

If not, make some sense of it without it. Give me another explanation. You can't. The idea that she had his love child explains everyone's behavior, and the 'coincidental' events as well, such as the lawyers arrest and the custody of the baby issue.

What would it take to establish that? It would have to be a DNA test. Well, family is now asking for one. In absence of that, all we have is circumstantial evidence. But it's an awful lot we have to go on.

Why did she say to police she was being followed by intelligence agents? Why did she later say it was at the behest of Obama? Why did she get in the car chase that ended her life? She was just crazy? All her supposedly irrational behavior makes perfect sense if you just believe her. When someone is accused of crazy irrational behavior, but then you are given a key to the lock so to speak, that crucial single bit of info, and it ties all the crazy behavior together so that it makes sense and is reasonable and rational after all, doesn't that make you consider that that info could be true?

The CIA agent (ever heard of a "handler"?) with a front company, that's only business was throwing Obama an inauguration party, with her name in this email account directory. The agent slanders her in the media, ruing her credibility. He is inexplicably given the child, instead of the mother or sister. That didn't phase you?

Obama did go to her office, where she was a dental assistant. She is pictured in thier website. Her meeting Obama isn't outside the realm of possibility. Neither is the concept of a powerful man having a love child and covering it up. Obama already had that other babe they sent to an island so she wouldn't talk during the election. Anyway, the idea of the lady flipping out and showing up at baby's daddy's work to start drama isnt unusual either. Mistresses and side-hos do that regularly (I should know hehe,) None of this is unbelievable. When the family played along with the whole crazy lady narrative, things were fine. When they started demanding the kid, played hardball and had thier lawyer start talking real shit, he was promptly arrested. Could be unrelated, but in the context of CIA shenanigans, and the love child theory, your telling me that didn't raise your eyebrow? What the hell would then? It rarely gets this juicy.

There's more and more but I'll stop here.

I don't know what to tell you. It's an extremely solid story, as far as conspiracy theories go. It warrants further investigation by mainstream journalists, with all thier resources.

I wonder what you could possibly believe on this forum, as nothing posted here ever has this much meat on the bone.

That leap, that speculation, is the thing that all the other bullet points come together to tie it into that narrative to make sense.

Right, and it's completely unsubstantiated. The timing of it, as presented by Faal anyway, is either coincidence, or completely fabricated, as are the rest of the stories from that source.

I've looked at the article you cite. There is a LOT of information there that you'll just have to take their word for. No citing, no explanation of sources, and a presented timeline that has no other bearing on reality other than 'Sorcha says so'.

Look, it's a great story. It's almost Dan Brown-level creative. But unsubstantiated is unsubstantiated, especially from a notoriously bad source. All of this stuff, the 'handler', the company, etc., is combined to push a single narrative that all relies on information impossible to prove, and ambiguous enough to disprove. This is how people get so badly duped.

You're free to believe what you'd like, but if I were you I'd spend some time trying to verify where Faal got the information. If you can't do it, chances are it's all crap, like every other story from the source.

This stuff is why this sub has zero credibility. Too many people posting fantastic stories with little or no evidence, and no critical thinking skills. It’s become a place for mentally ill people to try and rope others into their constructs. C’mon folks, if you want people to take you seriously, do a little bit of homework. You are being used as a TOOL by news sites that just make shit up out of thin air to make money off your gullibility.

Thin air? Sorchas articles linked to plenty of mainstream news reports, which oddly, for a conspiracy sub, seem to hold a lot of weight for you.

Yet I'm the one that failed to do homework? Ok I'll bite. You didn't read Sorcha, but what's the "homework" that I should have done to debunk this? You didn't do it either, your just running your mouth.

Feel free to point out the lack of critical thinking, beyond a blanket accusation, with no actual argument. As is stands, your just talking shit.

But let's see, gullible, tools, and calling me crazy. You forgot to use 'sheeple" somewhere. Yeah that's not right out the textbook for dismissing conspiracy theories. Just talk smack, call em' crazy, say they can't be taken seriously and whatever you do, never ever actually address the issue!!

Obama is CIA. Hereditarily. This is known fact.

I don't understand any of this, I would love to hear more.

His mom and I believe grandpa, on his Jewish side, were CIA. Dunham? She even learned Russian in college. That wasn't just for shits and giggles.

Until very recently, admission into CIA was initiated by personal recommendation. Which means a lot of family gets brought in. That's why CIA is dominated by Jews and Mormons too.

But yeah Barry was born into it.

I was unaware that his mother or grandfather had any connection to the CIA, thats very interesting. Where did you hear that?

Damn, it's not real? I thought my Christmas wish had come true.

I'd rather have CNN articles here than stuff from yournewswire... there are about a half dozen commonly posted fake news sites that show up on a pretty regular basis. I don't know if I'd want them full-on banned... but maybe some sort of flair to let the newcomers know that people need to be leery of anything coming out of that outlet...

I would agree with flairing them. I can't think of a single time I have seen a true story from the sites you are talking about.

Flair or an automod disclaimer would work for me...

We could look to introduce a 'untrustworthy' flair if users prefer that any links to YNW and the likes stay up.

The community does a pretty good job policing yournewswire links to make sure none of the shitpostery gets out of control... but a flair/disclaimer would probably help discourage it from getting posted in the first place... I'm fine with any Conspiracy Theory that might get posted here... but when they try to push it as a fact is when I get annoyed.

Yeah, known for fake info flair would work.

Why not just force them behind an archive.is link like you do CNN? That would at least cut down on the accounts fully dedicated to spamming those sites for link/ad revenue.

Sure, but the trick here is consensus. We were able to get consensus on the CNN thing because everyone was pissed off at the same time. But doing anything else that gets in the way of the flow of information just isn't easy to sell back there, and it shouldn't be.

That's fair. Thanks for the explanation, at least!

We were able to get consensus on the CNN thing

Do you mean among the mods? Because it was by and large a shitty decision to the majority of this sub, based on the comments and upvote/downvote totals in the thread announcing it.

Ya I did. But I think you might have it right. I don't actually recall how we made that decision.

The CNN banning thing always rubbed me the wrong way, since the reasons why people would post CNN links would either be partisan or legitimate discussion... but the only reasons I could think of for people posting yournewswire would be trolling, spamming or massive ignorance... In a sub like this I don't think CNN should be singled out cause every website is always peddling their version of the truth...

My position is all MSM should be archive only.

I would be fine with all MSM being archived as long as the user was sure to tag each link post with the name of the site being archived.

You are very easily manipulated if all it takes to embrace censorship is posting a few stories lacking sources you deem credible.

Now extrapolate this to a larger population.

This goes beyond a few stories lacking credible sources... this is more like thousands of stories lacking any sources. I don't want them banned, but I also don't want people actually falling for that clickbaity horseshit that they pump out on a daily basis. Yournewswire doesn't do any good for anyone aside from yournewswire.

Everything you are describing about YNW could also categorize CNN or other media outlets.

Here's 3 off the front page of YNW, with alternative sources.

Saudi Christmas Day Airstrike Kills 48 Innocent Yemeni Civilians

YNW - Source SABA News Agency Yemen

Two People Connected To Flint Water Investigation Found Dead

YNW - ABC Affiliate Source

Russia Concerned Over Reports That US Is Training Former Terrorists’ In Syria

YNW - RT Source

That is true... even "real" news sites pump out horseshit with anonymous sources or just reformat some other outlet's news and repackage it as their own... those don't tend to be the type of articles that get posted here from yournewswire though. We always seem to get the horseshit tabloid nonsense that doesn't ever seem to lead to a constructive discussion.

R/conspiracy is essentially a tabloid. Read it with that in mind, and point out the flaws in the story, but don't ask the sub to start censoring. We're too paranoid for that shit.

As soon as yournewswire threatens to doxx a user they should also receive a ban. Until then, they're just another tabloid that nobody with a brain believes.

Well here you go, YourNewsWire doxing a reddit user.

http://yournewswire.com/hillarys-server-guy-admits-he-was-told-to-hide-evidence-from-fbi/

I assume that's about Paul Combetta / stonetear? He's a public figure who was caught in the commission of a crime, and his identity was revealed by another reddit user I believe.

Absolutely not a public figure, but not surprised you have a stupid excuse for why that one is "ok" since it hurts Hillary. Hilariously transparent

An IT for a presidential campaign caught in the commission of a crime is absolutely a public figure. In any case, his identity was known before yournewswire reported it.

...known because he was doxxed

I assume that's about Paul Combetta / stonetear? He's a public figure who was caught in the commission of a crime, and his identity was revealed by another reddit user I believe.

Having frequented this sub for years now, the sad reality is that I’ve learned to see some of the linked “sources” for what they are: complete and utter horseshit. I wish, as I know many others do, that people wouldn’t link to them. But some people are just dicks with non-helpful agendas and so.....we get yournewswire, etc.

It's been something of a pattern. The approval a story gets on this sub seems to be dependent on how outlandish it is, and how closely it conforms to the posters' biases (Hillary is the devil, (((Soros))) is trying to destroy Western Civilization, lifelong Republican Bob Mueller is actually a DNC agent, etc.) rather than it actually being relevant or factual.

Oh hello shill.

Soros actually stated in interview that to derail nations for profit is just part of his job when he can see it as profitable. Why would he wish to destroy, he only wants to profit as much as possible. If this leads to destruction, then that's other people job to save the day for some coin scraps. And Hillary basically executed Libia Gheddafi gov which was quite loved and appreciated by his peers, and did that with joy, and i would have troubles find a better existing version of the devil. Plus all the rest, ofcourse.

Soros actually stated in interview that to derail nations for profit is just part of his job when he can see it as profitable.

Mm-hmm. Right. It totally doesn't have anything with him funding pro-democracy NGOS. Or with the fact that he's Jewish.

And Hillary basically executed Libia Gheddafi gov

The rebels executed Gaddafi, you idiot.

which was quite loved and appreciated by his peers,

Nnnno, he most certainly was not.

and did that with joy, and i would have troubles find a better existing version of the devil. Plus all the rest, ofcourse.

Man, your English is kinda shaky. Almost like you're more comfortable in another language. Perhaps Russian?

Man, your English is kinda shaky. Almost like you're more comfortable in another language. Perhaps Russian?

Geez man you only post here and on the Red Pill. Honestly pretty sad...

Try to google "Throwaway" and you will be enlightened.

Using a throwaway to post in T_D is pretty entertaining as well

Yes, you should try. Or you already do?

They tend to ban my accounts when I post anything counter to the narrative. So far /r/conspiracy has seemed less ban-happy, not saying much though.

T_D is quite cultistic in nature, which means the narrative is one and done. Conspiracy is based on a mindset which makes it a culture instead, hosting many narratives. Consensus achievement is out of the purpose since it's for debate. I'm curious btw, what's your take on theredpill? i found it an interesting phenomena.

I used to look around there a bit when I didn't have a girl... Things changed when I found someone and I realized they seemed to put too much thought and stress into it that would be better channeled into just improving yourself and developing human relationships, romantic or not.

Entertaining tho.

Absolutely, but if you notice the "leaders" are pretty relaxed with their life and are the "newcomers" that have this revengey feeling in regard. Feeding them some hate is a way to regain mindset after a too soft lifestart many of recent generations had, along the dependency from having women around. As i usually look with sociologic perspective i think it's a good thing to happen. Both men and women have deteriorated and it's a game of mirrors.

George Soros made his money as a currency trader. He is famously known as “the man who Broke the Bank of England” as he shorted pounds way back in 1992 when it was clear the UK government could not keep the UK in the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM). The ERM, in simple terms, sought to ease trade between then common market (present day EU) members with their own currencies. Central banks would manipulate interest rates to keep the value of a currency within a certain buffer relative to the then-king, the Deutsche Mark (DM). The treasury would be required to adjust interest rates and/or purchase pounds for the agreed rate so that the fixed exchange rate can stay in place.

George looked at the market fundamentals of the UK and realized, quite sensibily, that the UK was not Germany. As such, the idea that the UK could shadow German interest rate policy and aim for German-style low inflation was absurd. He bet that the Bank of England would blink first and stop supporting the artificially high price of the pound rather than waste away the country’s treasury. He turned out to be correct in the end and made billions as a result.

His “job” (if you can call a non-productive activity like that a job in the first place) is to make money. If the poor decicions of the political decision makers are what led him make that money it says far more about who is controlling the show than it does about someone who saw an in and took it.

I agree, that kind of "job" is a product of the times and of bad regulations, and can be useful to spot said regulations. For that alone he is like many people. But few of this people go ahead and use the problem-reaction-solution paradigm to enforce the kind of situation they can profit from - so things as lobbyism, arming of rebels, voicing - and to say it a la Chomsky - and actually manifacturing dissent. While on Hillary it's easy to go hard - she flaunts her evil - Soros i can only lay out the level of implied bad regulations inside the system necessary for this man to run his business like he does. But i would point to Soros and the controller both being part of a bigger traffic scheme. We the people don't control the politics, so those "controllers" are more of maddened empowered particles with a lot of business potential and usually the will to capitalize on that.

.... ummmm what?

CNN does explicitly lie, they obfuscate, hide and mislead. There's a huge difference between the lying of MSM and that of fringe fake news. Personally I'd rather piece stuff from info in MSM than these shit sites.

MSM is much more deleterious because the fakeness isn't as obvious

fakeness isn't as obvious

So, are you saying that people who post from YNW know they are posting fake news? Interesting.

I'm saying for most people it's easy to identify fake news from sites like yournewswire. It's not as easy for outlets like CNN

At least with CNN everyone knows it is fake news, whereas many don’t know YourNewsWire is fake, so I makes us look silly when some here fall for it

A lot of people trust CNN implicitly, even here. I'm semi-regularly affronted with commenters citing CNN as authoritative information.

Granted, there are times CNN does report what appears to be factual information, but the spin is terrific. Nevertheless, many people don't seem to see the spin or the deliberate manipulation of "facts" to tell a false story.

Well there are a lot of stupid people here. They literally have crisis actors in their SCENES.

let's not get carried away, yournewswire is pretty bad, but CNN is filthy, foul, CIA infested, systemic, epidemic level propaganda.

Edit: oh, and CNN are Reddit doxxers too, lest we forget.

prove it

I agree with posting them, but disagree that I would rather have CNN here. They are straight up curated news for making money AND spreading an agenda.

Im sure you would, clintonite

But the fact remains,yournewswire has not threatened to dox people.CNN has

The story from this summer that showed me it was a fake news site was when they were peddling a story about a massive elite government pedo ring and their source for the pedo ring was a story about the former mayor (2 year removed) of a town of like 5,000 in nowhere, Ohio who diddled a 14 year old girl. That is indeed sick, but the former mayor of a town of 5,000 is hardly an elite pedo ring.

Fuck YNW

I chalk them up to the same pool of trash with truepundant, news week, and Independent.

Those sites don't report on things like Serena Williams shapeshifting into animals.

literal fake news that I think is posted here to drive traffic. I think it should be banned

Agree with you OP, maybe we can look to add the suggested Web pages to our exclusion list. I'll run this idea past the rest of the mods tomorrow.

Good call... NeonNettle too

Upvoted

So you are also from Europe?

I mean, I agree with you, but this is a slippery slope. Ban one source and it becomes easier to ban the next. Then before you know it we can only post articles from moderator-approved sources.

Dilly Dilly,

I’m of this opinion too. There are plenty of sources that are a pile of crap - all of which I’d rather remain unbanned.

I can get behind that. The moderation shouldn't attempt decide which sources are good or bad. The best approach would be to take away the monetary incentive to post the articles here. If people still want to post an article for some other reason, then it would create more problems than it would solve to stop them.

I’d much rather see all links automatically posted as archive.is, with a link to the original in comments.

That's actually a decent idea.

Agreed.

You can’t cry censorship because someone shuts you up for talking shit and slandering someone’s name. At some point enough is enough and these sites should be disciplined for creating stories out of thin air for money.

....LMAO you must not enjoy freedom.

You must enjoy bags of dicks.

As soon as you start banning one website, you open the door for everyone to get a website banned.

Then when the mods don't ban x websites, the community gets into a big stink about it. The community divides into those that do and do not want a website banned. Shills could spam to get a website they don't like banned.

There's a rule coming into effect requiring each submission to have a comment explaining why it sad submitted. At least try this first and use the up vote and down vote buttons before starting to ban.

I agree, but I downvote every single link I see to that site. It's pure fiction.

Thx. Good point. I was all ready to jump on the fuckyournewswire bandwagon but your approach is reasonable

They know exactly what they're doing. You exposed their future moves for others to see. Thank you!

It's abundantly clear that you do. This whole post is about trying to get a website banned from here.

I don't support it.

Don’t play coy. Asking if someone thinks if you have an agenda is a bit silly since you made a post that’s agenda is meant to ban a source.

An outright ban of these sites sets a bad precedent.

These sources are well-known by the /r/conspircy community as fraudulent, and they routinely are downvoted to oblivion.

Occasionally, some slip through and they are moderated aggressively.

Also, it's a useful tool in spotting spam accounts, as they frequently post from these sites, making them very easy for the mods to spot.

And stop shouting OP.

Pssssst... :)

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/7m921i/comment/drsa6gj

I have, in the past year. Not as high effort so they didnt go far. And banning is the wrong answer, but your post generated ideas that I can get behind, flairs or automod, so the community can keep doing self-driven QC, with a boost.

Also, how do you feel about auto-flaring Yournewswire and Neonnettle?

Sounds like a decent idea to me.

We are already actively discussing it, while dealing with a fairly significant new rule change.

I disagree with this. I think requiring archive links would be a better alternative. Autoflairing also sets a bad precedent.

Fair enough, I honestly think that this sub does a good job of burying these posts, and that OP is slightly full of hot air...

Agreed. I think removing the monetary incentive for posting these articles would be both reasonable and sufficient to deal with any legitimate concerns.

I agree, no yournewswire no neonettle

They're the same ones that ran a story that 2 of Gowdy's congressional investigators disappeared in AR. An obvious disinfo site.

By this measure we can ban CNN, Washington Post, etc. too.

I think at the very least an automod rule that points out sites like yournewswire and small blogs as first-hand, possibly misleading information would be a very good start. Maybe Joe Shmoe with "25realtruthsaboutbigfoot.blogspot.com" really does have the truth about bigfoot, but I think a comment to remind redditors and commenters to keep their thinking caps on would serve us well.

ban divinecosmos.com as well. Damn blue sphere beings and blue avians!

That has far more credibility and validity than fucking your news wire that doesn't source or link to ANYTHING. Just pure made up bullshit. Divine cosmos has some interesting stuff wether you believe in Corey Goode or not they put out some great material and recently had a whistleblower come forward about underground bases and ET specimens being worked on

This is r/conspiracy right? Is this not the place where we discuss and decipher the bullshit? Banning sites for fake news is counter to what happens here. Sometimes, fake news opens a conversation that leads to real findings.

I'm with you. Let the less quality stuff get down votes. Why the need to censor it?

I understand the want to remove the stuff but I think the conversations that go on in the process of debunking is very valuable to the newly woke or people on the fence.

Silencing dissident; the first step of tyranny. Maybe well intended, but fuck you OP. "Cleaning up" lol.

"Cant control it" - dumb ass peoples answer - "Ban it".

Because not everyone agrees with censorship.

I honestly don't care. I DO NOT support censorship. It is better to show people how to decipher it than to just ban something.

It is not misleading until we figure out that it's misleading. I don't need you or anyone else approving something for me to read. We can take stuff down after reading and discussing but not before.

And please, it's just Poop. Mr. Poop was my father.

Cuz freedom fuck you thats why

“Support” is not the only alternative to full-on authoritarian censorship.

Hey, get it through your thick skull, people not wanting to ban this source of information are not supporting ,yournewswire, they are against censorship

People like you, wanting to control people and trying to convince people you know what's best for them is the reason human it is corrupted...fuck off .. You really think were incapable of judging a I for source for ourselves? Really?

Go blow your brains out, fucking stupid piece of shit

Yes. Nowhere else on Reddit can people speak their mind freely, without fear of immediate intimidation. (kinda like the fact that you even question the group on if free speech should be allowed and where it ought to be allowed (by the way I hate yournewswire))

You're in the conspiracy sub... um... idk i give up on you.

A lot of fake things exist for money. Start banning them and this sub turns into /r/politics. Downvote the articles and move on...every educated reader of this sub knows these sites are fake.

"Let's see how much the conspiracy sub supports the right to free speech" I never got this. I disagree with any messages of lies or hate, but god damnit, I would defend a Nazi speaking peacefully over the person trying to violently silence them. Education, not action. You cant fight fire with fire. You fight hate with love and education, wake the fuck up OP.

I was going to post this thought last night under that post but just did a \o/ instead.

The funniest part was while reading it said they found him on the ground clinching to dear life only whimpering.

No sources

No credible reposts

They make Beforeitsnews look like The New York Times.

Here's the thing about censorship...yes I agree with you on YNW. I agree with a lot of posts against these click-bait websites. You start censoring YNW, and UK tabloids? Soon people will want to start censoring Alex Jones. You start censoring Alex Jones, soon no Joe Rogan podcasts either. No Joe Rogan? No Delonge, no Greer, no bullshit; only "verifiable" websites.

A lot of you are not understanding the gravity of the Information War. There is a huge battle for hearts and minds raging everywhere, on every site, all over the fucking internet right now. From social media, to Alex Jones. From ShareBlue to [Insert Right-Wing Digital Team Here].

Both sides are spinning stories. Both sides are flat out lying. It's not just left, right, fake news in one spot. There is "fake news" everywhere from both sides. In the conspiracy world it is up to the reader to be informed, and to be able to put aside their partisan feelings and say "I think this article is bullshit." I've done it on several occasions with right-wing articles. I've done it a multitude of times with mainstream articles. The truth often falls in the middle somewhere.

Really? So giving way to a bit of censorship won't open up the doors for additional censorship?

I agree with you man, I hate the click-baity websites, but I'm not convinced that CNN/Fox/MSNBC/Politco don't use the same exact tactics that "alternative" sites use. They all provide spin. It's up to the reader to wade through the bullshit. In this day and age, nobody should be trusting any information.

People have to learn, and sometimes they have to learn the hard way, i.e. being let down 500 times in a row when someone posts "THE ARRESTS ARE ABOUT TO START ON THE CLINTON CABAL"

Thanks for sharing this, I was actually looking to cite this.

I honestly don't even agree with the mods decision here, but I understand why they did it, especially given the Wikileaks revelations of collusion between campaign(s) and mass media. I really think that any source should be allowed and it's up to the community, as a whole, to engage positively or negatively.

Obviously that's difficult, especially when the easiest website to write bots for is the facilitator of the discussion.

However, yes I agree with you. Archive.is links to circumvent ad revenue and click-thrus is ideal for these websites, and that'd be the most ideal solution. It'd probably help curtail the various bots that post link throughs to these sites. I wasn't trying to come off as an asshat, more of a devil's advocate to argue against censorship.

Slippery slope fallacy, huh?

So after YNW gets banned, you guarantee there won't be any more calls for censorship on other sites and you guarantee YNW will be the only site banned?

Again, THIS ISN'T ABOUT YOUR NEWS WIRE AND NEVER WAS. This is only the start of getting all conspiracy sites banned, leaving only tptb's msm's megaphone.

Nothing because the CNN ban was done to obey an incognito order of Donald Trump. If you want a site banned, you need to send an email to WikiLeaks, who will then pass a message along to Donald Trump Jr, who will then ask his father to declare the site "very fake news," and wala! It's banned.

Wish I could upvote your comment more!

It is.

I find neonnettle wildly entertaining - some of their stuff is merely that though, entertaining, but some of it is actually based on interviews. What they decide to extract from the information doesn't always 'match', as it were and the writing is a bit rough at times(English as a 2nd language, I wonder??) but -sometimes- their source information is actually a bit striking.

I guess I should be thankful I never looked at yournewswire.

And it begins....

THIS ISN'T ABOUT YOUR NEWS WIRE WHATSOEVER.

This is merely the beginning of the appeals for censorship. After all, just like how tptb care so much for us, as the OP suggested, it's in our best interests, right? /s

Where have I seen this before?? Oh, yeah, this is the exact play of google/fb/twitter/msm to call others fake news and censor their competition and/or anything tptb don't want us to read/watch. Not surprised I'm seeing cries to censor the opposition being pushed here too by people w/the same exact agenda as tptb's state-run media that is actively doxxing, crushing and censoring those w/opinions outside the mainstream they don't like.

If shills get their way, all "fringe," according the gatekeeper's definition, conspiracy sites will be banned and only MSM will be allowed and pushed, just like irl. What an ideal new r/politics this will be. I can't wait! /s

That is why you have the power to downvote. Even though those websites are utter trash, I don't remember either of them threatening to dox a Reddit user. Comparing it to the CNN issue is like comparing apples to oranges.

In order to do this, some limits would need to be set with regards to the "Archive.is requirements" because many members would argue that mainstream media sources "intentionally distribute disinformation".

I am not completely against doing this for the websites listed, but the precedent concerns me. Rules would need to be established for this to work properly, and I think the consensus on these rules would be too politicized.

That is just my two cents.

I guess the real question is who would it harm more?

The traffic of small, dedicated websites that research evidence-based conspiracies. Some of these websites depend on the traffic in order to continue investigating these theories.

or,

The traffic of large mainstream media sites that do not specialize in conspiracies

It may seem like having a default archive link has no unintended consequences, but there probably will be harm. It hurts the small budget researchers much more than multi-billion dollar corporations.

For me, I think it is easier to downvote the conspiracies that have zero evidence, or crappy sources. You also have the option to not even click on the post after you see the source.

I do think your post is important. It increases the awareness of propaganda, and it helps users differentiate credible theories from shit posts.

This isn't r/conspiracyFact or r/news. There is no proof for a lot of things that are posted - aliens, reptilians, giants, antarctic anomalies, etc...

I like to think that this is a place where people come to discuss conspiracy theories wantonly and lead others to the conversation. You should not be writing a thesis on anything posted in r/conspiracy so when somebody posts something from a less-than-reputable site you have the option of disregarding it and allowing others to enjoy the buzz. You want to dictate what other people can share because you don't find it credible?! Hello...we're discussing conspiracy theories!

Brush off what you don't like and let us have it. If you find r/conspiracyFacts too boring you can spruce it up by adding some verified news reports from credible sources.

Just because somebody posts something it doesn't mean they're gullible. I see r/conspiracy (actually, Reddit in general) as a bunch of people sitting around a bar going "Hey! Did you guys hear about George Soros?" then conversation stems from that. I don't necessarily believe it but that's why I say it. To see if anybody else knows anything to either prove or disprove it or to steer the conversation into something else interesting. In real life somebody would call bullshit and they would stay out of the conversation thinking everybody else was foolish. Can you imagine if that person appealed to authority to ban the conversation altogether? That's what you're trying to do.

When I first read the article I wasn't sure if I believed it or not but after reading some comments I'm convinced it's BS. Thankfully r/conspiracy allowed that exchange to happen. (I also saw a big hole in the story that nobody else has mentioned yet.)

Read the posts you agree with, ignore or downvote the ones you don't. But why try to take things away from other users?

Democrat Principal Defecates In Front Of Students During Pledge Of Allegiance

ROFL. Fools. This site is Republican partisan masquerading as "conspiracy" to win people over to "conservative" parties (Republican equivalents around the world).

This is the worst kind of Fake News out there. Not only fake, but crowding up a legitimate field and sucking people into partisan politics.

I'm inclined to agree, even though I am a super hardcore conspiracy theorist YNW and NN seem like complete BS to me. I wish they were true most of the time, but that doesn't make it so.

This is true. Many of these conspiracy-preying websites that get spammed here exist only to harvest ad impressions. A crackdown on these sites really needs to happen.

Our problem is when we see a shit post we normally check to confirm it's a shit post then post to point it out. They've changed their methods to gain cash through clicks, We must change to stop them getting it.

NO archivive.is-just ban these bullshit sites. Neonettle, nnettle and yournewswire are poison.

I do not support banning any outlet unless is know for mal-ware, phishing, and/or ad spamming

Fake news is Malware for your brain.

How about a "known clickbait" tag or something?

Fake news is countered by critical thinking, which is the reader's responsibility. I fucking hate that site, especially in the /new section, but I'd rather have it than any domain-based censorship.

What if we instead bring on new mods with permissions only to flair posts. Their job would be to respond to reports of misleading title or untrustworthy source, and flair accordingly.

Due to the core ethos of this subreddit being rooted in a deep respect for the free exchange of information, the only sites we have banned have been satire sites. Even CNN (an outlet which threatened to doxx users over their political views) is not banned and is allowed to be posted via archive links.

In the case of a site doing what you describe in your OP, the best solution is always to use your downvote to ensure such information is rightfully hidden beneath the voting threshold.

But it’s literal disinformation, it’s the kind of stuff the government puts out to confuse and obfuscate discussion. If you’re going to require cnn to have an archive requirement you definitely should apply the same to a cite that is made to farm clicks off of the people in this sub. Who knows, maybe the writers are venue personally posting the articles here, literally shilling their own product

so call them out as fake news and downvote? I dont get your concern....

My concern is that a large amount of people on reddit do not read articles and upvote based only on the title

That's something, imo, we should strive to correct by way of cogent comments and vigilance in the new section. We throw the baby out with the bath water, in my opinion, when, in the pursuit of informed discourse, we take steps (such as removing content) which limit that very discussion.

I realize its a difficult situation, as the presence of manipulative and false information very much does threaten the very foundations of our modern civic and social spheres; however, there has to be a constructive solution which does not need entail the censorship of content.

Okay, that’s actually a fair argument. I concede.

Heh no need to concede, your concerns as to the problems created when users only read titles are quite valid!

If anything, I hope you will continue to engage in discussion on the topic with the aim of helping us all find a workable solution.

<3

You tinfoil hat fucks make me sick. I come looking for drama, but all I see is “I concede”, platitudes, and this fucking heart instead of what could have been a poorly constructed, rash, and incredibly insulting shitshow.

Fuck you guys.

I didn’t want to get banned for arguing with an admin 😔

there has to be a constructive solution which does not need entail the censorship of content

With all due respect, censorship within Reddit is commonplace, this seems hypocritical to me. And reading your posts below, you seem to have an agenda, man.

I don’t think we should just accept that censorship within reddit is commonplace, so we should just censor as well

But this sub is doing just that with CNN.

so maybe we should try to get them to not censor CNN, instead of encouraging more censorship?

How is requesting an archive link censorship?

When the requirement is not applied uniformly, then folks begin to think it's targeted for nefarious purposes.

The purpose is to not give revenue to an intentionally misleading, click-bait, false news site.

No problem with that, do it across the board then.

That’s totally fine, let’s do it with all sources now

Not according to the mod posting in this exact thread:

CNN engaged in the behavior of threatening to expose a user's identity, thus that decision was not related to the view point or content of CNN.

Indeed, that is why the mod team made the decision indeed, as I explained at the time here- https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/9kwkwa/we-investigated-the-conspiracy-theory-that-rconspiracy-is-hiding-something

The same way voter ID laws disenfranchise voters

Hmmm.... yes, people's right to vote, exactly the same as some shitty literal fake news website.

That would be better than what’s going on now. Although I’d argue there is value in censoring entirely false sites that undeniably do more harm than good by spread consistently falsified stories. And I mean totally fake, not just misleading or reporting errors.

actually, I retract my earlier statement, because I realized that the mods aren’t actually censoring CNN. Articles from CNN are still allowed through archive.is. R/conspiracy is merely banning direct links to CNN, reducing the amount of revenue for CNN even just a little as a form of protest against the doxxing incident. The sub still allows CNN content, so it isn’t really censorship. In that case, there’s no comparison between banning CNN for doxxing and censoring a different website for fake news.

Censorship is censorship, and in my opinion we shouldn't censor somebody even if they're demonstrably wrong. The fact people read and accept headlines without reading the article is unfortunate, but that doesn't mean we should censor all possible discussion around it, that's the first amendment. And I know the first amendment obviously doesn't apply to subreddits, but in my opinion the idea behind it is still strong and should.

It stands pretty uncorrectable when groups of users use bots to mass upvote their unverified claims. People are far less likely to blindly upvote things that don't start off with 5,000 upvotes.

Part of the reason blind upvoting happens is we believe that previous upvotes are verification of the content.

Looking at /r/conspiracy alone you can see this happens quite often. Especially from a certain sub.

You realize that massive amounts of botting happens site wide on Reddit especially in regards to anything negative about a certain political party right? The amount of news articles I've seen reach front page that have been retracted or proven incorrect is laughable. Yet here we are saying ban an already laughable sub because they posted 1 fake article about the beloved political party puppet master Soros. And the one person that actually had a logical response

so call them out as fake news and downvote? I dont get your concern....

Got 600+ downvotes. If you want see the propaganda and manipulation from both sides I don't know what else to say.

Dude, lay off the commas.

All of his commas were used completely correctly, though. He even spiced it up with a semicolon.

Yea well fuck you.

And managed to miss an apostrophe. If you're gonna try hard to sound intelligent, then at least get some shit right.

While technically correct ("the best kind of correct!"), he might have benefited from examining the flow. Sometimes the best route is smaller sentences rather than a string of linked subordinate clauses and parentheticals.

The problem is if someone that already frequents a bias sub such as this one sees a post that has 20 upvotes automatically assumes it must be truthful. This is a reddit and social media problem in general but if your going to make rules to ban certain links from certain news because it's "fake" then you have to do the same with actual fake news. Or else you are hypocrites and are spreading propaganda to fit the subs narrative and shaping people's opinions. People are too gullible for that shit.

Let me tell you about a thing called "bot". Those are pretty useful you know. Please don't use the bullshit argument of "use your upvotes/downvotes" , because it's just that ... bullshit.

I don't think we have time to re educate entire generations. Because that is the solution to this type of problem. We were literally raised during a time this stuff didn't really exist. So you're asking that all of reddit is better educated and can sift through all the misinformation accordingly. While your point is completely valid, I think it's too late.

Not giving a platform for known clickfarm-garbage sites with hand-designed headlines optimized to obtain maximum clicks despite the absurdity and falsity is not necessarily the same as "censorship".

Censorship would be auto-banning anyone who mentioned a certain topic that the mods or community find distasteful, a la r/conservative and literally anyone who, in their comment, types out the phrase "southern strategy" (AKA a ubiquitously documented, well studied, contemporaneously-recorded/memorialized, more or less undeniable part of US history) in a context that isn't something along the lines of "The southern strategy is fake news propaganda made up by the jews and democrats who are bitter about the election and about us patriots remembering the (libtard/democrat/race traitor/but still pretty cool guy/had a change of heart at the end when he did the thing that SHILLARY murdered him personally for... with her own "A L I E N"(TM) slimy, acidic saliva-excreting, jaw-extending tongue/smaller-head-with-it's-own-set-of-jaws protrusion-thing/abomination/horror-bio-apparatus) patriot seth rich and his G R E E D Y sell-out parents who are trying to silence the TRUTH in order to keep their dirty jew sell out money they earned by lying about his murder by SHILLARY CLINDUMB HERSELF"

we should strive to correct by way of cogent comments and vigilance in the new section ... there has to be a constructive solution which does not need entail the censorship of content.

How do you reconcile this viewpoint with the mod-team decision to restrict CNN to archive.is links?

CNN engaged in the behavior of threatening to expose a user's identity, thus that decision was not related to the view point or content of CNN.

You're a fucking moron. Just so you're aware.

But they never actually doxxed anybody...

Sounds an awful lot like content, to me.

Besides, it wasn't a "user's" identity, did the information not come purely from the individual's own publicly accessible social media accounts?

Those have been posted here all the time, even side-barred if I recall the Pizzagate related events correctly. Remember, about some restaurant who's profile picture was of a statue of a historical figure tangentially related to pederasty?

Killing people should not be forbidden. We should strive to correct the behaviour through frowning at people doing it.

Hey there, how did you find this post as the top level submission is removed?

Did you come here from another subreddit?

Hey. I am a fan of yours and stalk your posts.

https://snew.github.io/r/conspiracy/about/log

My dad owns computer

pee is stored in the balls

it sure would be a lot easier to just ban the literal fake news website from here

i mean come the fuck on

The decision as to CNN and the requirement for the use of archive links for that site had to do with the behavior of the site in regards to the threat of doxx against a user, when it comes to the content of articles such as the ones you point out, we recommend using your downvote and leaving a comment to inform others of why the story is false/incorrect/misleading.

But it’ll still get upvoted to the top of the sub, and if people click on it it will give them $$$

No it won't, I've stated elsewhere ITT that when they slip through the cracks they are moderated aggressively.

Banning sites is a slippery slope, and /r/conspiracy won't be going there.

You guys make the argument that demanding archiving is in no way shape or form anything close to a ban when you wanted to pseudo-ban CNN. Why not do the same things for these disgusting disinformation sites?

Look at the fake stories this site is posting - Soros, pedo rings, Antifa mass murderers - all anti left wing which furthers the narrative the mods here want to push. Also wouldn’t be surprising to find out one of the mods has a hand in this site. For a sub dedicated to outing conspiracies there sure is a lot of shady shit going on behind the scenes.

CNN threatened to doxx a reddit user, which is patently against reddit’s rules and ideals, so i can understand why r/conspiracy is singling them out

It’s almost like CNN doesn’t follow Reddit’s rules

Journalists "doxx" people all the time in their articles, it's a normal practice and has been for hundreds of years. This time, a CNN journalist decided not to publish a name as a fucking favor to the guy and ya'll flip out about it.

can you give an example of journalist doxxing a user purely over a political post?

Journalists write all sorts of articles about people and politics. That's super old too.

Also, that user you are talking about was a racist, hate-mongering, genocide-loving POS. Most of his posts were vile comments and he BEGGED that CNN journalist not to publish his name(even though the practice is normal and expected). Like I said, the journalist did him a huge favor and that was a huge mistake as you guys are twisting reality.

Remember /u/violentacrez? He was the mod of /r/jailbait and got """doxxed""" by a journalist. I'm surprised people here didn't try to rewrite history on him too. I can see it now, "/u/violentacrez just liked young, beautiful girls and a big old meanie journalist DOXXED him. The man was a SAINT."

Unmasking Reddit's Violentacrez, The Biggest Troll on the Web

I talking about it in several other comment chains, but I think that doxxing is only ok if the anonymous poster alludes to illegal activity, eg being a mod of r/jailbait. But people shouldn't be afraid to post political views and opinions for fear of being exposed. Sure, some liberals might think that the user CNN doxxed was a racist POS, but I'm sure some T_D users think pretty badly of those liberals, and wouldn't be afraid to tear those liberals apart if they were doxxed.

/u/HanAssholeSolo posted that Trump wrestling CNN gif that Trump retweeted and so the post blew up. That attracted the attention of a CNN journalist who decided to do some research on the person that posted it, which lead him to reddit. From there it was very easy to find out who /u/HanAssholeSolo was as the guy doxxed himself. Anyone that knew about google.com could have found him.

So while writing about /u/HanAssholeSolo, that CNN journalist looked at his very public reddit comments and found that this guy had horrific comments about black people and genocide, wanting to kill people, racist comments, bad stuff about Jewish people, and the works. The guy also happened to be a Trump supporter, but the article wasn't about his "political" views unless you consider the above political.

I'm sure some T_D users think pretty badly of those liberals, and wouldn't be afraid to tear those liberals apart if they were doxxed.

t_d doxxes people all the time so that's true!

You could require archived links.

Btw, I love the username.

As others have pointed out, its pretty hypocritical to punish one source for doxxing when several other outlets and communities have openly doxxed people without repercussion.

Your own subreddit has had issues with doxxing as well.

examples?

Of which?

Pizzagate had doxxing in it here on /r/conspiracy, and ultimately /r/pizzagate was shuttered because of doxxing, most of whom were people that came from /r/conspiracy.

T_D went on a doxxing spree, including hypothesized reddit accounts, with their Anti-Antifa doxxing list.

To name two groups who were given special permission to dox on /r/conspiracy.

The decision as to CNN and the requirement for the use of archive links for that site had to do with the behavior of the site in regards to the threat of doxx against a user; when it comes to the content of articles such as the ones you point out, we recommend using your downvote and leaving a comment to inform others of why the story is false/incorrect/misleading.

This is fucking stupid. I am not surprised.

You're a fucking shit mod.

terrible mod, terrible subreddit

fucking t_d cancer-spread

sharpening tips of pitchfork the mods are in on it, you say?

I came here from subreddit drama for this

Paging u/pitchforkemporium

Removed. Brigadez.

It's worse than that. Literally everyone you disagree with is in on it.

Your mods are shills, face it.

Removed. Rule 10.

With regards CNN, that decision was made due to the actions of cnn in relation to their doxx threat.

We would not take the same approach as to the content of any site, as that is beyond our role as janitors. In very limited circumstances, such as satire sites, we have made an exception to that policy; but even that, that is really an exception which proves the rule as it was defined in a specific manner for that very reason.

How do you feel about literal fake news? Secondly, do you think disinformation does this subreddit a great deal of harm? Or only a little bit of harm.

A substantial amount of harm, which is why we ban satire sites (literal fake news).

How do you feel about Yournewswire taking advantage of this subreddit by purposely distributing disinformation primarily for clicks. Why no archive.is? What's the harm in that?

As that is an issue with the content of the articles, rather than any specific behavior per se, we would still recommend a downvote and comment in such a case for the reasons discussed throughout this comment chain.

When it comes to content of articles, we encourage users to post comments and use their downvotes as a way to counter any misleading information contained therein.

We will continue to ban satire sites, but only sites which threaten users with doxx (for the time being) are subject to the archive rule.

The standard we use for satire site is if the site has a disrepair indicating its articles are such; we aim to remove as much subjectivity from moderation as possible, which is why we use such a strict standard with regards exceptions to our commitment to the free exchange of information as a maxim.

That submission would probably be flaired after a mod vote, yes.

That's not what he wants at all and it's getting so bad I'm starting to wonder if that's your site up there.

we got a real life conspiracy on our hands here!

Mod is actually shapeshifting Beyonce invested in making yournewswire look bad.

O shit

Ding ding ding, we have a winner here!

Not that this is great evidence or anything, but we know who the person that runs yournewswire.com is. Source.

The mod you're trying to break out of doublethink seems to be a Boston guy, not an LA guy like Adl-Tabatabai.

I wanted to believe

Hey, what's to stop you from ignoring the "inconvenient" information and believing anyway? This is /r/conspiracy after all!

Fair enough. Yeah he just seems to be being obtuse on purpose.

That mod is sticking to the script or they're incapable of understanding a simple, direct argument that contradicts their opinion.

Are you incapable of understanding the point or are you being obtuse on purpose?

He's clearly being obtuse on purpose.

It is the Alt Right's number one tactic right now: "act like an idiot and you win the argument."

No. He wants you to impose archive linking for fake news. He's not being unclear.

So a news site with fake news claiming its real is allowed but a site with fake news claiming its fake is bad.

Idk how you are mod of this sub, your behaviour is the exact behaviour conspiracy theorists try to warn people about. Its sad that shills like you got a hold of this sub.

Removed. Rule 10.

Don't bother debating these people dude.

You're doing a fine job.

What is the harm in archiving articles?

Of course this dude is a city fan

Don't stalk user's profiles.

It's an online account openly viewable by users here. There's no rules against looking at user profiles. Quit power tripping

You're doxxing him!

Lol holy shit free flow of info... fake news is fine... but whatever this guy said got removed? You're disgusting.

Oh noes I'm going to look at your history! God forbid somebody looks at a users post history. This mod is out of control.

Ok mom

what a perfect lil bitch move that is.

these trolls are terrified of having their words thrown back in their face.

Nothing means nothing anymore to the trump-boi's huh?

We need to maintain high levels of credibility. That's the whole point of r/conspiracy.

Ah yes. The sub that brought you such gems as PizzaGate, the moon landing being fake, and vaccinations cause autism is now worried about its credibility

Not to mention the day care debacle.

You may as well argue with the closest wall. No matter how well you explain your point, all you're going to get back is a wall of bullshit.

We both know what we're reading from that mod is bullshit. And all they're doing is defending their bad decisions.

Why do you continue to allow them to make money off of this subreddit.

Now this may be a meta theory but maybe the mods are making money from that site. They are saying to downvote instead of personally policing because even a topic that gets a downvote after your investigation still drives some traffic from your investigation.

Satire isn't the only form of fake news, genius.

You are so full of shit. This is controlled opposition, and you are picking winners and losers based on your political bias and not any objective criterea.

You’re flat out fucking lying.

Just curious why this action wasn't taken against the sites that ACTUALLY DID publish personal details about the Reddit user Stonetear. That was doxing too, right?

Because those sites weren't CNN and the mod team here are right wing conspiritards who hate CNN.

The only correct answer.

Also, the mods don't want to ban fake news sites that they profit off of.

"rules are for thee, not for sites that push my agenda and worldview"

You are the very definition of controlled opposition. You are a joke. This policy is complete shit.

Definitely - YNW is satire at best. I cringe at the term, but it's the literal definition of fake news. It's never been more than that - they trawl /r/conspiracy for topics and then put a bunch of random related lies together to generate clickbait. There are other sites from YNW as well - I can't think of the names of the top of my head but there are several on the same network and it's been discussed here in the past.

It makes me want to cry when I see good people expending energy commenting on those links.

Ok how about archive only for more sites? The information without the clicks and cash.

But that would make it harder for folks to post fabricated right wing hit pieces about Hilary Clinton running the cocaine market out of el Salvador and well, we conspiracy types only care about that so, no.

Keep posting fake news, CNN can fuck off tho.

So then why not make a manditory archiving since that's what you did for CNN. You know damn well that bots rocket every single T_D cross post to the front page reguardless of actual content. There is nothing real users can do to combat that.

CNN is banned to archive links for breaking site rules and threatening to doxx a Reddit user. It has nothing to do with the validity of their content.

Except you know they didn't dox anyone. If doxxing was a problem T_D and Pizzgate would have been banned LONG ago from this sub. It seems like rules only matter when they do against the established narrative of this sub.

Pizzagate (as a concept??) and r/the_donald doxxed Reddit users?

Yes, T_D has doxxed multiple people, multiple times.

Like in this case

Or in this case of Pizzagate the entire sub was banned for (amongst other reasons) doxxing people based off of a completely flippant, disproven conspiracy theory. However, T_D continued to dox people over it.

While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

I don't see where Reddit accounts were doxxed in either case. What am I missing?

Social media accounts, including Facebook accounts, and a few unverified Reddit account names, were included in the list before it was deleted.

That being said, you're excusing their behavior on a technicality.

I'm not excusing the behavior at all, but it is beyond the scope of this subs concise reasoning behind the ban of direct links to CNN. I mean, what do you even propose?

Not sure if shill, troll, autist, or just retarded

Me, a shill? For whom?

All.

where in T_D were redditors doxxed? It looks like it was happening in 4Chan and discord. I mean that “technicality” is the whole point. CNN threatened to doxx a redditor, T_D didn’t

So doxing someone is only bad if they happen to use Reddit?

No, but why the fuck would you ban a sub that didn't doxx anyone.

Because if they doxxed period that's bad enough? Being threatening isn't just a bad thing if the person uses the site. What the fuck kind of logic is this?

There is not logic with this guys, they are a cult

doxxing only bad if it’s against a Reddit user for some reason: lmo

No, doxxing sucks regardless. In this case, it was a decision made about a particular entity that threatened doxx of a Reddit account.

cites the paragon of journalistic integrity known as BuzzFeed.

Despite the ridiculous name they do some great work....

Ahhah look at that a leftist using Whataboutisms!!!! LoL

Serious question, what is your definition of a "leftist".

Anybody who doesn't want to suck Trump's dick.

Ive seen neo cons and Hillary supporters called leftists, I get that language can be fluid but this is too much.

What does that makes me, a person that is anti monopoly while believing in a regulated free market with publicly funded social safety net.

COMMUNIST.

It's pretty hilarious. Before the election, people who didn't support Hillary were called Nazis. Now after the election, people who don't support Trump are called communists.

Obama was called a Socialist, words mean nothing when team politics are at stake. I don't know when conspiracies became synonymous with the American right, but the community has closed its eyes to any wrongdoing by the US government under this administration.

Obama is considered, on the global political spectrum, to be Authoritarian Right. Perhaps by U.S. politics, he can be considered left. Source: https://www.politicalcompass.org/images/usprimaries2012.png

Additionally, and I know you're not asserting to the contrary, but I want to state that the U.S. practices socialism in a variety of ways that the average American utilizes everyday. The military, for example, is one of the largest examples. The public roads we use, the infrastructure, public transportation. All of these are inherently socialist by design.

Out of curiosity I read the 2016 compass.

Trump supported a decent minimum wage from the start, wants free education in state universities, has supported universal health care, consistently opposed the Transpacific Partnership Agreement and wants more bank regulation. Considering the cosy relationship that the Clintons and Trump have enjoyed until almost yesterday (reflected by Trump’s generous support for both Hillary’s senatorial campaigns and the Clinton Foundation) the mercurial Donald's differences may be less than they presently appear. Is it beyond all possibility that a Trump 'bi-partisan' presidency might include a role for his old friend Hillary?

There's about 2 consistently truthful things in that paragraph. The rest is a mix of hope and delusion. Political compass consistently labels Stein as a centrist though. I imagine most Stein supporters would find that bizarre.

I don't know when conspiracies became synonymous with the American right,

The answer is Cambridge Analytica, they have a search algorithm that is able to categories personality traits and political beliefs using a database with info on almost every adult American filled with data from their social media activities. They worked out conspiracy theorists are easy to manipulate when you push the right buttons for an individual, their algorithm automatically found them and worked out their buttons and sent them fake news stories that confirmed their conspiracy beliefs and were also pro-trump, anti-Hillary.

because there are a lot of people who don't support trump who are supporting the idea of communism. i live in canada and our politics are fucked up as is but man i feel sorry for how much a hivemind your country has become.

it is anyone who i more liberal or progressive than they are. Hillary and the Neoliberals are corporatist in the extreme and are basically watered down versions of republicans themselves.

to steve bannon and the other Alt Right groups, George Bush, Mitch McConnel and Paul Ryan would be "Leftists"

to McConnel, Ryan and Busg Clinton, and Obama would be leftist.

And to Pelosi, Schumer, and the rest of the NeoLiberal Corporate Dems anyone that wants to get money out of politics is considered a Leftist since getting money out of politics is, Strangely some sort of Liberal Progressive position instead of being a bipartisan one.

to steve bannon and the other Alt Right groups, George Bush, Mitch McConnel and Paul Ryan would be "Leftists"

Nah, they at least have the sense to make up new epithets like RINO to rile up their masses.

But you're right that in general politics is like traffic - anyone faster than me is psychotic, anyone slower than me is an idiot.

Totally agree. I would go as far as to say there never has really been any room in American politics for a true Left. The Centrists are painted as batshit liberal hippies so that the conversation never actually moves left of that position because that is just "unrealistic" or "a pipe dream". What happened with Bernie is the perfect example of this.

America is a war machine after all, hard to continue to sell a shit ton of weapons if there is no one fighting. The thing that really sucks about this is that the propaganda has been doled out for so long that now a slip into far right fascism seems normal for some.

Nothing wrong with being liberal, it's actuall better in some cases.

lib·er·al ˈlib(ə)rəl/Submit adjective 1. open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values. "they have more liberal views toward marriage and divorce than some people" 2. (of education) concerned mainly with broadening a person's general knowledge and experience, rather than with technical or professional training.

In reality you'd be a Teddy Bear Republican. Too bad we're an endangered species :/

A leftist is basically anyone someone on the right disagree's with.

so what if two people who both say they are on the right disagree with each other? are they both leftists? meaning now they can be on the right again, since a leftist is disagreeing, so now they are on the right they are now on the left for disagreeing with each other...

oh look this is retarded.

That's when you use the term RINO. Purity tests are sacred to the establishment.

This is almost correct. I have seen people attack others for being "Librul" when that person came back being pretty far on the right, they just had a weird stand on an issue.

Yup! Usually I hear, "Typical liberal.."

And then I go on to explain why I'm not but they've stopped listening.

That’s not a word that’s used.

This is true in the same way anyone who doesn't agree with the far left is a nazi. Same kind of stupid on opposite sides of the spectrum. Both are cultist in reasoning and reliably dishonest.

A more practical definition for a leftist could be someone who believes in total equality of outcome. When total equality doesn't exist, it's because of hidden power structures and oppression. They are also obsessed with gender and race. This all somehow ties in with Palestine because that's the big cherry on top: Unwavering support of Palestine and hatred of Israel.

To review: hidden structures of oppression all around us. Fixation on race and sex. Palestine good, Israel bad. Leftists.

anyone who doesn't agree with the far left is a nazi

what?

A more practical definition for a leftist could be someone who believes in total equality of outcome

what?

They are also obsessed with gender and race

what?

This all somehow ties in with Palestine

what?

Fixation on race and sex. Palestine good, Israel bad. Leftists.

???????

hidden structures of oppression all around us

Like leftists

Fixation on race and sex

Pedophilia is okay, brown people are not

Palestine good, Israel bad

Jews bad

Leftists

Nope, current day Republicans by your definition. They're that far removed from self awareness, it'd be hilarious if it weren't so sad for our country as a whole.

Damn dude you're weird.

er, no, naziz are nazis. problem is, a lot of far right folks seem to have a hard time speaking against naziism or condemning them at all so it makes us think, ya know? I always thought it was easy to call neo-nazis unamerican, evil, traitorous scumbags, but a select number on the GOP and their supporters are reluctant to agree

I love how the current alt-right, who is obsessed with pretending gender identity doesn't exist, is always desperately trying to confuse themselves into believing every else is obsessed with what they are obsessed with because whenever they talk about it someone says "Shut up you bigoted asshole." Why is the alt-rights only defense to who they are some game in which they pretend everyone else is more at fault for whatever they're criticized for? It's so obviously "I know you are but what am I?" BS whenever they do it, and even if the imaginary people really were as bad as they are in their imagination, that doesn't excuse all the bigotry they stand for anyways.

It's mind-boggling how purposefully dumb you have to be to convince yourself you're not a shitty person because you rally for inequality. It's oddly the more intelligent ones that just say "Yup, I'm a bigot/racist/whatever", the others are just as guilty but are dumb enough to believe they're patriots.

Anybody that believe that if you are not bashing Trump then you are a right-wing Fascist KKK Trump dick sucking supporter

IRL, I've seen the opposite, many people want to give trump the benefit of the doubt even though all signs point to him buddying up to his own kind, big business.

Goldman Sachs loves trump, and trump loves Goldman Sachs.

So you excuse is Whataboutisms?

This comment is literally a whataboutism of the previous comment that's not a whataboutism but a regular part of a conversation.

Good job, re re.

So basically we are in a Whataboutisms circlesJerk ... Or a Whataboutisms Inception.

That's the goal of that propaganda technique, good job fulfilling your directive.

Whataboutism (also known as whataboutery) is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument, which is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda.

I am not the one that started the Whataboutisms, I just pointed it out. The, the other guy pointed that my pointing out of Whataboutisms was in itself a Whataboutisms, I then pointed out that he just circlesJerk the conversation or creates a Whataboutisms inside another Whataboutisms.... If anything I am just a spectator rolling down your team's shit filled slide..... WEEEEEEEEEE!!!

cool, good luck with your life, must be tough.

According to SouthPark I am in easy mode.

We know.

Actually I am more in the middle...

We don't care

Republican just change the words. When did pro choice become pro abortion?

Because Pro Abortion sounds much worse.

Rule 10, attack the argument not the person. This is your warning.

Dude, the voting in this thread. Just, wow..

Yeah, I'm used to it by now but this thread is worse than most I'd say.

It's insane and worse by the second, lol. Who woulda thought r/conspiracy had this many CNN fans?

Do you think it may be CNN bots?

Bots of some kind probably, or just trolls from TMOR or the like. This thread was probably linked somewhere off site or in a private modmail or something so now everything in here is getting mass downvoted.

Test: CNN is an organization that threatens free speech by weilding their power to Doxx individuals when their feelings are hurt.

Are you guys going to consult the admins about this post? You would have to be deaf, blind and retarded to not see the brigade in here.

We have in the past but for the most part they just say something to the effect of:

We're looking into it and will take the proper action.

And nothing noticeable happens. If you want to shoot them a message by all means go for it.

I'm on mobile and using Reddit is Fun, so I can't see if there has been X-posting at the moment. Is there an r/CNNistheBest sub?? Too funny..

Believe it or not there are /r/conspiracy users who don't buy the bullshit trump is spewing.

Yeah right, there's obviously something bigger going on. Can't you see??

the left wing brigade squad man, they're coming to getcha

(actually t_d are the brigaders but they like to project as you know)

Believe or not, there are several people that spend enough time here that they can detect patterns. For instance, some even noticed the "active user" surge before this "brigade" and noted it in a post.

Believe or not, there are several people that spend enough time here that they can detect patterns.

sure those cats are in perfect mental health...with impeccable hygiene and social skills

I wouldn't know about all that, only that they were here, observed and documented.

This is incorrect. I don’t hate CNN like r/conspiracy does, but they 100% doxxed a 15 year old. Saying that they didn’t is a boldfaced lie.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/5/cnn-threatens-reveal-reddit-user-real-identity-ove/

This is incorrect. I don’t hate CNN like r/conspiracy does, but they 100% doxxed a 15 year old. Saying that they didn’t is a boldfaced lie.

But they didn't dox the person. I'm not sure you understand what 100% means.

Doxxing, blackmail, whatever, it’s all semantics. The point is that CNN threatened to ruin someone’s life because of a shitpost which pokes fun at the network. However, I have since read that the poster wasn’t 15 and I removed that from my comment.

Ok calling for violence against CNN and "accusing" docents of CNN reporters to being jewish (without any proof) is now shitposting.

Will be fun when I hang up pictures of you being a pedo in your street and saying "oh dont mind me. I am just shitposting".

Also he is not a 15 year old! He is a middle aged man. And neither did they doxx him. They contacted him and he paniced.

All I’m saying is that CNN crossed the line. Imagine Fox acquiring something stupid you said online and threatening to share it with the public if you don’t apologize. It’s pretty fucked up. I feel like I’m holding a moderate stance on this issue, but I’m getting downvoted to hell. I guess some people don’t want to see issues with people they agree with ¯_(ツ)_/¯

Shrug all you want. You flat-out “boldfaced” lied about CNN doxxing someone and asserted that THEY crossed a line, while the anti-Semitic user calling for violence is excused by you as “shitposting”. Sympathizing and enabling this stupid as shit behavior is the reason you’re being downvoted, not your not-so-subtle hints at how moderate or rational you are

¯_(ツ)_/¯

Next time, remember that reddit eats the first \ in the emote. So you have to add two more.

¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯

Will create ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Good bot.

A newsite reporting on news and talking about newsworthy individuals is doxxing? Cause that’s not a moderate opinion, that’s simply not know what doxxing is.

Doxxing, blackmail, whatever, it’s all semantics.

Well yes, because words have meaning and if you want to communicate to others you have to use the correct words to convey your message.

You JUST heard that he wasn't a 15 year old? Lol. You must be so well-versed on the story.

They threatened to reveal the identity of a pathetic, middle-aged loser who spent all his time on reddit advocating genocide and pushing Nazi rhetoric. That piece of shit deserved to be exposed. I wish someone from CNN had just decided to say fuck you and released his information to the public. I like my Nazis with labels on them. A Swastika carved into their foreheads would be a perfect step forward.

I expect the loser was a mod here

They 100% doxxed someone.

Doxxing, blackmail, whatever

They didn't dox him it says so in the article, can't you read?

Of course not. u/AwJebus and u/AssuredlyAThrowAway never read the actual story regarding CNN and the neo-Nazi memer, they just bought into the t_D narrative.

Every time something is shared by POTUS people want to know what and who was behind it. In this case, CNN found out and also found that the guy had a history of extolling the virtues of murdering minorities and the homeless. So the guy apologized preemptively out of embarrassment and thus CNN decided for leniency whereas normally everything available would have been reported. The problem was that CNN phrased it as "don't fall back into old ways or we won't be so kind next time" and people flipped shit to defend a literal Nazi.

Fucking disgrace. You heard me u/AssuredlyAThrowAway. You're a huge part of the reason this sub is a toxic off-shoot of t_D. You don't even educate yourself on the actual conspiracy at play when it goes against your narratives.

I'm eagerly awaiting your t_D style censorship. Try to come up with a better ban reason than their "Suspected Muslim" line.

I disagree with your analysis, as CNN's actions fundamentally threatened the free exchange of ideas on the internet. It was a lot more than doing someone a favor. They attempted to dictate the individual's political views under threat of doxx. It was an abhorrent and disgusting act, and we stand by our decision to prohibit direct links to CNN's domain. Cheers.

They contacted a man and asked him for a quote and he asked to remain anonymous. That's journalism 101.

"We will release your name if you advocate view [x]" was basically what they said.

No it isn't

You don’t seem to have an understanding of how reporting works. CNN is under no obligation to keep that dumbshit’s identity a secret; they are doing so cause the idiot owned up to making comments—with veiws that he doesn’t want people to know he has, even “ironically”—and CNN wanted to move on.

What CNN basically said was “we’lol hold up our promise, of you hold up yours”. That isn’t censorship or doxxing, it’s an agreement.

So if CNN found a redditor was responsible for working with the russians and creating fake news stories, would it be doxxing to release their name?

Sad to watch mods like you turn r/consipracy into a conservative fakenews tabloid.

It sure does seem like rules are being twisted and scewed to fit a very pro-trump agenda. The first defence of the banning was that CNN doxxed. Now you are admitting that CNN did not dox and have come up with a 100% pure arbitrary rule that seems to have been made for this one occasion to justify banning a site for disagreeing with the established narrative here.

Wow. I haven't visited this sub in a while, but I'm glad I haven't. People like you really ruin it, u/AssuredlyAThrowAway. If you're not going to be intellectually honest, at least pretend to have a good reason.

It seems like we have a real conspiracy with mods being compromised by t_d or Russia. You're still spreading complete lies, he was never doxxed. He was called for a quote and he asked to remain anonymous which is basic journalism. You argument is exactly what a heavily biased t_d user would make. Or even worse, a Russian.

That’s some hardcore double think right there.

Hey thats wrong and also a 15 yr old posting hatred on t_d proves not only that that sub should be banned, but also that they're all tendie begging losers

They didn't doxx him; it was a threat to doxx that made people upset.

And he was a middle aged man, not a 15 year old.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/cnn-hanassholesolo-response-trump-2017-7

He wasn't 15.

You realize there's no crime or offense outside of Reddit rules called 'doxxing', yeah? That it's perfectly in accordance with American free speech and journalism rules to do such a thing?

Just because it’s legal, doesn’t mean it’s right. It’s legal for corporations to amass huge profits while paying their employees like garbage, but I don’t think it’s ethical.

You do realize that in many cases it is the actual job of journalists to reveal the person behind some pseudonym? Literally their job.

No. They didn't doxx anyone

Wow, you're a huge fucking douche

This is incorrect.

but they 100% doxxed someone.

Saying that they didn’t is a boldfaced lie.

Not once, not twice, but three fucking times you said some shit that is patently false. You couldn't craft a single correct sentence. I award you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul.

What he said: CNN threatened to doxx a Reddit user

What you think he said: CNN doxxed a Reddit user

What actually happened: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/5/cnn-threatens-reveal-reddit-user-real-identity-ove/

Oh hey welcome to Reddit

Finally,a rational comment.

Gotta scrub the account every couple weeks. Was doxxed for speaking out against Trump once here. Won't happen again

Bull shit youre a fucking shill account

Believe what you want sweetheart.

Removed. Rule 10.

T_D would have been banned by the admins months or years ago if they took part in doxxing, you’d know that if you weren’t just spewing crap out of your mouth.

Pizzagate did technically doxx.

Untrue, spez keeps t_d around for the ad revenue. T_d literally compiled a fat list of "suspected leftists" in their discord and Jack shit happened

Why would actions done on a chat group outside of reddit have a subreddit banned?

Because it's linked to the subreddit, populated with the subreddit's users, and facilitated by the subreddit?

It’s not breaking any reddit rules though, nothing is being done on Reddit.

And yet if a leftist sub did this you would probably be screaming about it all the time...

Probably not, I think T_D is a shitty sub that gives conservatives a bad name but i don’t think reddit rules extend past reddit.

Except for CNN, the reddit rules apply there apparently.

No they don’t? You can do whatever you want over on cnn.

Woooooosh goes the point.

This entire conversation is about how the mods of this subreddit are applying Reddit rules for doxxing to CNN and using it as their justification for censoring them in this subreddit.

Mods =/= admins

How mods run their sub is different than how admins run the entire site. Some mods ban people automatically for posting in certain subs, admins don’t ban you based on whether you visited racist websites or stuff like that.

Once again missing the point, either you are unable to grasp the point intellectually, or you're intentionally missing the point because you can't defend or respond to it, either way you're a waste of time since your point is neither here nor there.

Got any proof of that?

https://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthis/trump-supporters-have-built-a-document-with-the-addresses?utm_term=.jpOrPJKMn#.ttJOYBa83

lol

Isn’t that evidence of the mods deleting those types of things and other users going against doxxing as well?

Because that’s what your link is.

152 points (82% upvoted)

Is that doxxing? What online persona was being revealed?

That’s like saying those penny papers that list people’s mug shots are doxxing people

HAHA thats hilarious, posts on T_D get 60% of every vote counted towards them. literally mitigated so that every upvote gets a little more than half a point. that way its too hard to tell if your upvotes are not being counted since the % rounds to the nearest whole #.

You honestly think that every sub who posted during the NN thing didnt have bots? or a manipulated algorithm i garuntee you it did. and tons of the users just went along with it and upvoted everything or downvoted everything to remove the nonsense off of their /all, yet there was almost no posts other than those related to NN despite plenty posts being above the threshhold of upvotes needed to make /all

or when every post was about a senators vote for a day. that nonsense was definitely manipulated.

if anything T_D is being unfairly squelched by the top of Reddit. the only reason they have not to ban the sub is to keep them in the corner with their subs votes mitigated. thats why their crossposts do so well, because their votes actually get full credit.

Hell there are even lists of people who belong to T_D and rated based on their upvotes in the sub. honestly its completely insane how much T_D is censored.

😂😂😂 this guy

What was it.

i guess those tactics must be in play now too for your post eh?

Jesus Christ are people really this fucking delusional?

Yea... he's what you call a shill.

http://imgur.com/6PR6g.gifv

Not sure where youre getting the 60% thing, thats pretty... Out there. Im guessing that you upvote it, refresh the page, and the number didnt change to what you thought it should. Is that correct?

i will say, it seems that i have full credit for my posts as of right now. but during the time when i was getting upvotes it seemed as though i wasnt getting full credit.

everything i post seems to be controversial to some degree so its possible that i was getting influx of downvotes and upvotes simutaneously, but it is also possible that the algorithm was temporarily set that way and then changed back once someone brought it to light.

The % i got at the time was based on the math i did during my posts credit i was getting vs the amount of upvotes i got.

"it would seem that at 296 upvotes, i have 228 Post karma - 59 base post karma. so this post has given me 169 post karma

296 maths 169 which is roughly 60% of the credit"

that is how i came to that conclusion. perhaps it takes a few days for my account info to catch up to the data on the actual post or something since has been changed. either way it resolved itself when i wasnt looking.

People don't believe this? Really? The manipulation going on on Reddit is so obvious.

Or... Its real users, like myself.

https://imgur.com/JqYTmjn

God damn, Ive stated this in many threads in this sub but never have I been downvoted this much. There has to be some sort of brigading going in. Because ussually this sub is something like 40/60 pro trump anti trump. Which is enough to get plenty of posts to the front page of the sub even if it's nowhere close to the reddit front page.

How the fuck do you not get it?

The Donald is NOT popular. You're under the illusion that when you post there, your posts are voted up by like minded folks.

When you visit ANY other subreddit, those posts don't get voted up by bots, and actual people bury your shit ideas.

If there were actually a bunch of people upvoting TD posts and comments, you comment wouldn't be downvoted to Oblivion, because other real people would obviously back up your point if those same real people actually voted.

Fuck man, this is a simple concept. Please, try to grasp it.

To be fair, the Top Minds subreddit linked here, so there is a bit of brigading going on.

That being said, you are correct that TD and their trash-posting get lots of assistance from bots. While many of the users are aware of that, but it's a low-information / low-intellect subculture, so the vast majority of their users don't know what's going on and likely never will.

And yet in posts not brigades by politics or SRD, the political opinions of mine get up voted.

lol

such as...? I'd like a link, I don't think I've seen an upvoted pro-trump post or comment on reddit, outside of right-wing echo chamber subreddits.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/359730-trump-thinks-scientology-should-lose-its-tax-exempt-status

When he cancelled tpp all of reddit sang in glee

I was specifically curious about posts or comments of your own - perhaps you meant to link the reddit thread for that story?

Nobody likes t_d

Cool, I do and idgaf about karma so you guys can try to suppress my opinion, but doesn't stop me. Thankfully this sub is more rational when it's not flooded with the rest of reddit.

Do you think t_d is rational too?

Sometimes

lol

Top kek

"Thankfully this sub is more rational when there's only a small amount of delusional political autists."

Hahaha

Quit whining. Most people hate trump because he's a piece of shit. Wake up

Cool, I don't and 40% of Americans don't.

Good to know the majority of Americans aren't total morons.

The majority of Americans... did not vote.

My point still stands. The majority of Americans did not vote for trump. Trump voters are the minority

My point stands that those who don't vote should shut the fuck up.

You're saying people who don't vote should have no opinion on politics at all?

Okayyyy and who’s to say the person you’re replying to didn’t vote?

Who knows? You might make assumptions of who I voted for and you may be spectacularly wrong. But the historical fact in America is that voter turnout is embarrassingly low.

Yeah and that is the saddest part of all. The amount of people who are wilfully ignorant or simply uninformed with you does make you more right.

And you can insult me but I'm never argued with....

Are you aware that it's not a good thing that 60% of Americans think he's a moron?

Ok? And? Mob rule isnt good

And anti-democratic minority rule is?

Little lower than that lately..

And 50% of Americans are below average intelligence.

Yes Republicans on average are middle class while democrats on average were lower class?

Trump won the middle class vote by huge margins, not the low class vote

Wow. You could not be more wrong. Trump won in mostly rural areas that are known for their poverty and low education rates.

Cosmopolitan bias intensifies.

Look at the mixer income, 40-70k income group he won by a landslide, or that on average the average Hillary voter made less money than the average trump voter. But ok continue to make up shit

Just look at where Trump won and the average income for that area along with the poverty rates. Lol

Just look at the total average income for both voting groups. You can win new york and not get a single vote from a millionaire or billionaire to make this example extreme. Yes trump won pretty much the vast majority of America land wise, and only a handful of counties actually went to Clinton, but that doesn't mean she won the middle class vote. Every poll and study other there shows trump won middle class, Hillary won lower class, and upper class was relatively split.

And not the more educated vote.

If you don't count educations in shitty liberal arts that don't add anything, no. Education in goods producing sectors including ip such as engineering, computers, etc, trump also won

Source?

how did you reply to my removed comment? I don't even remember this thread at all or what I said, or deleteing the comment

Name looks slightly familiar, but no clue what the conversation was about. I ran a script to edit all my comments, not sure why it notified you of a new comment. Bizarre.

Any chance I could have that script? I want to run it, but ignore all posts from certain subs which I think I could figure out.

I used https://www.reddit.com/r/PowerDeleteSuite/

There is a link and guide stickied at the top of that sub. Fastest one I've used and doesn't piss off the automods of the subs.

I'm sure the majority of those are too embarrassed to admit they helped a narcissistic sociopath gain control of the country they claim to love.

Lol ok buddy, or we are happy we are getting so much agenda done even with a congress that can't get shit done.

Literally controls every branch of government. Lol.

Supreme Court is evenly split between constitutional conservatives and judicial activist, just like it was before scalia death. Trump isn't in charge regardless of that or congress. Congress is 51 seat majority I'm senate. Many many things can not be passed because 60 votes are required, and even with the 51 seats, it takes only 1 or 2 of the more liberal Republicans to not want it for the bill to go down.

That literally doesn't dispute a thing that I said. The Republicans control every branch of government.

Very rare? The court was considered balanced before scalias death and it's considered balanced now.... 4 conservatives, 4 revisionist, and 1 person who is really neither.

Lol continue to live in your bubble but the Republican party has a pretty wide base. From those that won't vote for anything that increases the national debt to those who are ok with socialized Healthcare.

Very rare? The court was considered balanced before scalias death and it's considered balanced now.... 4 conservatives, 4 revisionist, and 1 person who is really neither.

Your bias proves you are unable to discuss this point intellectually, because you've proven you can't examine this point intellectually. Balance is not a requirement of the court, your opinion on the beliefs of each member is clearly uninformed and unresearched, and you failed to address the point that this seat was considered valuable to maintain control of the court, and it did just that.youre just attempting and failing to move the goalposts into a discussion around balance and potential swing votes in the court.

Lol continue to live in your bubble but the Republican party has a pretty wide base.

The only person living in a bubble, unironically in a thread where they are adamantly defending the necessity of their own bubble's existence, is you.

From those that won't vote for anything that increases the national debt to those who are ok with socialized Healthcare.

Just a plain and simple misrepresentation of the reality of the current GOP platform and the Party's currently elected representatives.

So what judge is the 5th conservative?

So what judge is the 5th conservative? Balance isn't a requirement of the court, because personally I'd love every judge who thinks they can interpret the constitution the way they see fit thrown out and replaced with strict constitutionalist who would bring back the protections or the 2nd 4th 9th and 10th amendments.

As defined by you, therefore also not applicable per your first rule that they cannot have bias. You instead meant to say they can only have YOUR bias, which is why no one particularly cares about your opinion, it can be easily dismissed as partisan garbage.

I already know which judge you will claim is conservative, and I am ready to show you how they agreed with the judicial activist more than Clarence Thomas who is the best Justice on the supreme court imo.

Once again proving you don't have the intellectual rigor to discuss this topic due to being unable to step away from your own bias to examine the court and it's members.

So again I ask who are the 5 conservative judges. 4 are easy to name, and I know exactly who you would claim is the 5th, but that judge agrees with Ginsburg more than Thomas so clearly they lean to the activist side more than conservative.

None of that was opinion. My opinion is that Thomas is the best Justice, and that Ginsburg is a senile crazy person who doesn't respect the constitution. You can't even talk about the facts, so our discussion will never advance to the opinions.

So again I ask who are the 5 conservative judges. 4 are easy to name, and I know exactly who you would claim is the 5th, but that judge agrees with Ginsburg more than Thomas so clearly they lean to the activist side more than conservative.

There is no answer when you frame the question as a lie, there are no "activist" or "revisionist" judges you dumbass.

None of that was opinion. My opinion is that Thomas is the best Justice, and that Ginsburg is a senile crazy person who doesn't respect the constitution.

Your opinion carries less than no weight.

You can't even talk about the facts, so our discussion will never advance to the opinions.

Because you're clouding all the facts with your shitty opinions, do you generally find that no one wants to discuss facts with your in real life, this is why.

Your Russian comrades can't save you here.

Lol ok, I'm definitely Russian, just look at my account history.

Nah, you're just the result of Russian efforts which targeted the most mentally feeble Americans.

Lol ok buddy. It's not that I've been conservative my whole life and we finally had a candidate that would say the shit that was needed to be said because most Republicans were spineless corporate shills.

I would hate to check your profile and get banned for "stalking" by /u/AssuredlyAThrowAway.

That's not a bannable offense. Go through my profile. I don't even care if you do doxx me.

Well if you checked the link you would see a mod is going around giving warnings to people who might check out another users profile. I'm not doxxing anybody but I've got screenshots of t_d calling for doxxing people.

Show me then, could just as easily be someone trying to get our sub banned, because the mods are super heavy handed about banning anyone that threatens violence, promotes doxxing, or is racist. (actually racist, not just anti illegal immigration and nationalist)

Sure. This was taken right after Charlottesville in a post with a picture of a woman holding a Nazi flag. She was protesting with the alt right Nazis. They claimed that since the flag had creases it must have been bought off Amazon recently, therefore she's a Soros plant. Apparently there's no way a nazi could buy a new nazi flag on Amazon.

So that first user says "certain individuals should track down the identities of these people." Just straight up trying to doxx them and it gets upvoted. They love it because they think they're paid by Soros to make them look bad.

So noone doxxed, just some idiot said someone should. It was also removed because it violated the subs rules and mods are against doxxing. What's to say it wasn't up voted by bots? Thanks for proving my point by bringing up a removed post.

Sounds like you're confused. You should reread because I said I had screenshots of people calling for doxxing which is exactly what I provided. So you just try to downplay that with "Noone doxxed." You said it was removed, do you have any evidence of this? I would love to see a source.

What's to say it wasn't up voted by bots?

Is there any evidence to believe they are bots? This is a very irrational and convenient way of thinking. If t_D does something bad and upvote doxxing then they must be bots, even though you have 0 evidence for this. In reality it's upvoted and there are several comments obviously not from bots in support of it. But it's amazing seeing you try to rationalize this.

Thanks for proving my point by bringing up a removed post.

Can you show me the post which was removed? I'm not sure how you know which specific post it is when I removed the names and only described it to you. If you do that's great I would like to see it.

Because the mods remove everything about doxxing, or else the sub would be banned. There's a reason you are sending screenshot and not actual links.

Oh so you don't have any evidence and you just made that all up. You can see from the screenshot that those posts were several hours old with up to 155 points. There was no rush to remove them at all. The reason why I'm not providing a link is because this screen shot was taken in August and I didn't save the link. Also I'm not going to give out real names of people who are calling for doxxing in case anybody tries to doxx them. I, unlike people from t_d, actually give a shit about people's privacy and removed their names for their own safety. Even when they are calling for doxxing people.

155 points is nothing in the Donald. You have never looked to see the activity. A top thread usually has many many 500+ posts

155 points is nothing for doxxing in t_d?

So impressive for a subreddit full of bot accounts. /s

oh no where did u/dylan522p go? It seems his posts have vanished?

It's pretty shameful to defend doxxing so maybe his conscience took over. I saw him in /r/hardware getting downvoted to shit and lolled. Absolutely deplorable.

Or... Its real users, like myself.

Thank you mods. I was going to bring up CNN but you already did.

Holy shit this thread. Why can't i find you people in real life?? I would go bonkers

they're mainly socially awkward teenagers who don't get out much in the first place

or bots, or russian trolls, but we don't talk about that apparently

the best solution is always to use your downvote to ensure such information is rightfully hidden beneath the voting threshold.

With that said.................sticky

Ahem

This is asinine. You need to ban the site that has no real news. If you don't want to do it then you should step down and let people who will do a good job mod this sub.

Russian Shill. Go fuck yourself.

How are news stories about shapeshifting not satire?

Moderate Republicans think Hillary Clinton is a reptilian alien, wheather or not she can shape-shift is a valid topic of conversation. What if she took the form of the God Emperor from time to time? How would we know?

If anyone took the form of anyone that could be held responsible for the shit that goes on the entirety of the planet, I'd be forever grateful.

Conservative voters are the problem, without them Utopia would be inevitable.

Yeah cuz all those cities that have had democratic leaders for decades are pure Utopias right? Get your head out of the left vs right diversion.

The diversion and subterfuge are so strong in the USA. Mindless peons still caught in the distraction their politicians created to keep the populace fighting amongst themselves while the politicians laugh and count their money together. I guess I can't blame them for being so warped by it.

It's not a distraction when one side is so clearly better than the other. Shut down the useless and unnecessary Republican party and oppose Democrats from the left. All right wing politics are lies to fool their ignorant voters.

They have to send off all their money to the over-representated red states to cover food stamps for all the disabled trailer park Republican voters, while dealing with a republican instigated, racially motivated "drug (race) war."

> What if she took the form of the God Emperor from time to time?

disney's trying to tell us something!

Good Mod, thanks

CNN is FAKE NEWS

Thank you viewoftrees0011 for voting on AssuredlyAThrowAway.
This bot wants to find the best and worst mods on Reddit. You can view results here.

^{Even&#32;if&#32;I&#32;don't&#32;reply&#32;to&#32;your&#32;comment,&#32;I'm&#32;still&#32;listening&#32;for&#32;votes.&#32;Check&#32;the&#32;webpage&#32;to&#32;see&#32;if&#32;your&#32;vote&#32;registered!}

Bad mod.

You know, the more caps you use the more true your WORDS BECOME. Sad!

SJW Libby to the rescue

We do what we can

Is Fox News fake news?

No,

I really can’t tell if you’re a troll account or not. So hats off to you on that one. But if you can’t see that CNN and Fox News are two sides of the same coin you’re pretty dense. Partisan networks that present news and information differently in order to fit their respected party’s agenda. I would argue that CNN at least tries to appear unbiased, but obviously they lean left. Fox News on the other hand... I don’t see any effort.

why are you like this?

I think he’s a troll to be honest but I can’t tell. He comments in r/the_Donald and r/conservative only but he also has a post asking about a dog collar so something tells me he’s serious.

Aspies gonna asp

Wrong. Fox Labeled themselves "entertainment" because they couldn't call themselves news with all the untruth.

Triggered af

State propaganda shill.

Infowars.com

Alex Jones 2024

You shill harder than any Hillary supporter. SAD!

I think you might actually be autistic.

Are you a human dingleberry?

lol you're an idiot

Too many buzzwords in such a short sentence. You could just say that anyone who disagrees with you is a cuck. Then like everyone in your life, we can pretend you don't exist.

I AM GOD

Lol trump humper

Weren't you a mod of r/pizzagate? Should retards be allowed as moderators?

banned and reported to admins for cross sub brigading.

The admins should maybe consider nerfing some of the power hungry mods on this site.

The admins should maybe consider nerfing some of the power hungry mods on this site.

That would require them actually giving a fuck about Reddit. Ain't nobody got time for that shit.

That's not how reddit is set up at all though. It was designed from the beginning to be fairly hands-off. The idea is that if mods are really running something to the ground, then we can just start a competing sub and the 'free-market' of reddit users will migrate to whichever one is better. It has happened numerous times in reddit's history. r/trees is one of the more famous early examples.

what did r/trees migrate to

r/trees was the migration. The original was r/marijuana. Way back when, there were just two mods and they implemented some heavy-handed rules on what was and wasn't okay to talk about. In the uproar that followed, one of the mods quit and the one that remained turned the assholery up to 11, banning people left and right. It also came to light that he was a racist douche. So everyone up and left and formed r/trees as an alternate, which thrived. Later on, someone wanted to make a tree-oriented subreddit but r/trees was taken so they formed r/marijuanaenthusiasts as a joke.

r/marijuana today is run by a completely different team and seems like a thriving enough subreddit, but r/trees is the main pot subreddit that everyone knows.

I don't even smoke, but I've always liked that story.

i got banned from r/trees because i posted about being high and at the time i was under the age of 18 and i mentioned it in the post. good times

Lol you guys are a fucking joke.

Removed. Rule 10.

i bet they'll take your complaint very seriously.

Fuck, this sub is shit. The mods are obviosly bias

This sub has been completely taken over by Trumpets and Russian trolls.

*biased

And yes it always has been shit

Psst: It’s “biased”.

Ok thanks.

They propably even get paied by YNW.

r/conspiracy r/the_RedPill etc. are more or less their marketing group.

bad mod

Thank you 2FastHaste for voting on AssuredlyAThrowAway.
This bot wants to find the best and worst mods on Reddit. You can view results here.

^{Even&#32;if&#32;I&#32;don't&#32;reply&#32;to&#32;your&#32;comment,&#32;I'm&#32;still&#32;listening&#32;for&#32;votes.&#32;Check&#32;the&#32;webpage&#32;to&#32;see&#32;if&#32;your&#32;vote&#32;registered!}

Good bot.

Bad shill

Bad argument, please try again

Good commentary

Fuck, I responded to the wrong guy. Oh well...

Or did you?!

https://i.imgur.com/TimSPgd.gifv

Eat a dick

You are literally fucking retarded, and/or a Russian Shill.

This is why your subreddit is a joke.

Damn. Some of the mods on this site are fucking so fucking garbage. Who thought that giving these shitheads so much power would be a good idea ? No one man should have all that power!!

This is perfectly reasonable. Reddit is insane. Especially for this to show up on the front page as " r/conspiracy mods go to great lengths defending their decision not to ban a literal fake news website while still standing by their decision to ban CNN links"

No this is fucking ridiculous and the reason I'm done with this sub. If someone can point me in the direction of an unbiased conspiracy website/sub I'd appreciate it

You're an idiot.

Removed. Rule 4.

Fag

core ethos of this subreddit being rooted in a deep respect for the free exchange of information

I've been here for a few years, and that statement couldn't possibly be further from the truth. This is become a hivemind, and you know it.

Lmao. You clown. Disconnect and go discover reality again

So which one of you guys owns the site?

Bad mod

That site honestly has to be satire right? I mean have you read the shit.they put out?

Bad mod

From one mod of a popular subreddit to another, Fuck you.

Just keep that fucking Sorcha Faal shit off the page, and I'm cool.

Just call it out as fake news if you see it and downvote and move on. r/conspiracy should NOT be in the business of censorship for any source, unless provoked.

Free speech is free speech and this thread stinks of hidden agenda (I hate self posts that sound an alarm, so called)

I abhor Hillary, but I dont think (hope?) most people here think she is a 500 year old shapeshifting Reptilian from the depths of Atlantis.

Learn to separate the bullshit than expect to be spoon fed---this is called critical thinking.

r/conspiracy should NOT be in the business of censorship for any source, unless provoked.

If someone lies to you again and again and again for years on end, refusing to listen to them isn't censorship.

No bans but we should encourage or require archived websites. Easy fix, doesnt censor anyone, nobody gets advertisement revenue, and it exposes shills.

If this site is Pro-Trump, I am against banning it. Conspiracy users are smart enough tell the difference between real and fake news. We should not be in the business of banning websites.

If, on the other hand, the site is critical of Trump, it should definitely be banned. Conspiracy users need to know when websites, like fake news CNN, are trying to trick them into being against Trump. Banning* CNN was a great achievement and has made conspiracy great again.

Conspiracy users are smart enough tell the difference between real and fake news.

Conspiracy users need to know when websites, like fake news CNN, are trying to trick them into being against Trump.

You wrote two paragraphs, and actually managed to display a picture-perfect example of cognitive dissonance.

my dude, please.

YES.

No, don't censor anything, fake news should he downvoted, ffs if any sub should find fake news it would be this one

I hear you. I propose that the unintended consequence of banning of this garbage is pushing it elsewhere, rather than shining light on it and allowing further exposure of the lies therein.

Consider "hate groups". Rather than banning their speech, we all benefit from letting them freely spew their filth, so it can be rationally addressed and then eventually die under the weight of its own fallacy.

While I understand the overt sensibility of your plea, I must say that censorship has a history of being counterproductive.

But that would set a standard that would cause the ban of most other /conspiracy sources.

Any censorship is bad. If you're for it, you don't grasp how history repeats itself. Ban one thing, then another, and finally the rest.

And fuck you pseudo intellectual cunts that whine about "the slippery slope argument". It works both ways. Introducing more restrictions or freedoms always starts snowballing in that area.

Weird seeing a month old account trying to push for censorship and banning on this aub.

One hundred percent. Would love to see gateway pundit get the boot, too. Utter lies and shit.

No thanks. I prefer to distrust all sources until I can get more info anyway. Banning some means you are "trusting" others, and that is just stupid, as we all have seen.

The continuation of allowance for this site and ones exactly like it are a prime reason why we're a fucking joke of a sub and I'm ashamed to be here. Let's address the elephant in the room and do some connecting of the dots in regards to sites like this and other outlandish, straight up fucking stupid ideas that get tossed around here by uneducated dumbfucks with the gullibility of an autistic newborn. We face a political threat of silence at all times, especially on this medium of information flow. However, the lack of accountability for establishing FACTS before discussing theories will continue to allow this sub to eventually be gotten rid of (just like with many of the other subs associated with these fringe retards). To those saying "the educated readers will sift through the BS"...the problem is we have straight up illiterate, non-critical thinking tards and they often become louder than actual plausible conspiracies. And fuck you if you think the downvotes here matter, that's a smoke screen.

We should ban users who call for banning stuff...wait, um...

lol, the beyonce / serena williams shapeshifting story sounds pretty good!

Well...maybe ban all of them EXCEPT that one.

It’s definitely a garbage site, but I don’t know if banning is the way to go. Just filter out that source when you scroll through.

did they doxx anyone like cnn did? fuck trump/clinton

SO very much agreed. They are a straight up operation in my opinion..

There's a clear, absolutely distinct difference between alternative media sites and these 100% fake, 100% of the time misleading fake sites Your News Wire and Neon Nettle. They are in a league of fakeness far outside sites like the Free Thought Project, Activist Post, ect.. I have worked with the real alt media sites for almost 5 years now and I promise you, every single necessary source is cited as evidence as hyperlinks in the articles, and bullshit doesn't make it through.

This sub doesn't care about facts. It cares about narratives.

Alternative facts, if you will.

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all. -Naom Chomsky

So stupid. You can support free expression and still stand against outright fake news and propaganda

"You can support free expression and still stand against outright fake news" This is a problematic statement. I'm not going to get all philosophical, but this subreddit (reddit in general) are media outlets run by the people, for the people; not some group (there are mods but that is beside the point). People hating that retarded website is good, but the website should not be banned, for minimal censorship.

I think we're pretty good at calling out the fake shit on this sub. When sites become blacklisted it will cause repercussions. The sites listed are bullshit (yournewswire, neonettle, etc) and I've gotten aggravated and called for their banning in the past. But I think we'd be better calling it out ourselves, as a whole. Downvote and most people wont take the post seriously.

Your such a fagggot lol

I say that I've never heard of it, but I don't think we should ban anything, ever. It should be up to the community and voting system to decide visibility.

Banning sources is a very slippery slope.

Banning information is the action of the weak and the stupid. If you disagree, it's only because you don't know which of the two apply to you.

AssuredlyAThrowAway is a puppet.

Seems that it's meant to be a parody site with some political trolling thrown in. I hate sites like that unless they are truly funny and clear about being a parody.

Hmm its such an obvious "fake news" site that ive always read it thru a satirical lens. The ppl that run that site are pro Putin lol

Whoa there hillary. Calm down with the censorship huh?

We're perfectly capable of downvoting stuff ourselves thanks.

We really don't need you to label stuff as unacceptable for us.

Whoa there hillary. Calm down with the censorship huh?

We're perfectly capable of downvoting stuff ourselves thanks.

We really don't need you to label stuff as unacceptable for us.

We get it. You don't like that site and that frog really is a hate symbol.
yes yes. such a huge problem with your one month here.
Downvote and move on.

These are great forum shifting threads. Ok archive one like CNN. Then archive them all. No censorship no clicks for cash

No. Require it to be archived if you want to limit traffic.

Let information life and die on its own merits. God forbid anyone do a few minutes of research.

Raising awareness that YNW is trash is fine. But don't outright ban them. Perhaps linking an archive of a story they're peddling helps outline a globalist conspiracy being pushed through Internet media?

its white propaganda, leave it alone.... it will not harm our cause if it make a few awakened people start researching. they have their propaganda we have ours..... propaganda works. so leave it.

their are different types of propaganda black, white and grey.

Can we further this discussion? We need to vet other sites as well. I’m still not caught up on the sites and am not easily trusting. Zerohedge and addictinginfo come to mind.

You could say that for half the "news sites" and blogs that get posted here as gospel daily lol

People can make up their own mind. I dont like how popular talk of banning sites has become. People are smart enough to make up their own minds.

Fake news will always be there for the Sheople to believe. It is directed towards the sheep. Here you are preaching to the choir, true conspiracy followers. Most here know who the shills and bots are and we just play them for amusement. Question everything, nothing is the real truth.

No banning! Use your down vote and your words. Every platform has the potential to educate us, even if it does so in unexpected ways. Even working to disprove a popular "fake" story does more good than if we never saw/thought about it's contents

No banning! Use your down vote and your words. Every platform has the potential to educate us, even if it does so in unexpected ways. Even working to disprove a popular "fake" story does more good than if we never saw/thought about its contents at all.

That's MYnewswire you're talking about bub. Watch it.

New conspiracy: r/conspiracy mods get paid too

I’d like someone to go on cnns front page and send me a link of an actual fake news article.

What say you all?

I'll let Noam Chomsky answer:

The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum – even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there’s free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.

Noam Chomsky, The Common Good, 1998

Spaces in which to discuss that which is outside of the spectrum of generally acceptable discussion are vitally important in a free society. "Conspiracies" can be and often are ideas which simply exist outside of the spectrum of acceptable opinion, whether they end up being true or legitimate or not. I find many conspiracy theories to be absurd, offensive, dishonest, or simply insane, but conspiracy-spaces matter because some of those absurd, offensive, dishonest, or even insane ideas sometimes end up being right. How many times has that which was initially dismissed been proved true later?

That's why it's time that the current moderators of this subreddit be removed from their positions, for allowing such an important space to become another arm of a political movement, for banning and limiting the expression of uncomfortable or unpopular ideas, and most importantly in being wholly biased in their implementation of the rules. It would be one thing if CNN was banned and YourNewsWire was banned, but the fact that the rules apply to one source which is critical of the President and not to another source which is supportive is a clear indication that this is not /conspiracy, it's simply another wing of the alt-right and supporters of the current US administration.

All of them need to be removed now. No more chances to do the right thing. No more waiting. No more compromise. Remove them, all of them, immediately.

Until that happens, this subreddit does not deserve it's name, and meta threads like this will keep appearing day in and day out as the hypocrisy and bias of the moderators continues.

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all. -Naom Chomsky

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all. -Naom Chomsky

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all. -Naom Chomsky

Because just because liberals like yourself shout "fake news" doesn't make it so. You try so hard to destroy us, demoralize us. But you will never win.

Lol

troll?

No!

Maybe the mods are making money off these fake news sites. The mods here keep making the claim that we should be using the downvote system to take them down. Instead of doing due diligence they want us to investigate every one of these known fraudsters and drive traffic whether we downvote or not. It is specifically noted in the rules that removal of fabricated sources are subject to removal. If this were really about public discourse, then we should have to sort through the trash to get real content.

Maybe the mods own the site? Now that is a conspiracy

You know who else wanted to ban things? The Nazis.

I smell something fishy going on between r/conspiracy mods and this fake news site (and perhaps others)

Have you all considered that you seem like a paranoid cluster of Forest Gumps?

That rule 6 tag is a dick move. It's like 4 words.

*Hear, hear! Fuck that site!

fakeness isn't as obvious

So, are you saying that people who post from YNW know they are posting fake news? Interesting.

I can get behind that. The moderation shouldn't attempt decide which sources are good or bad. The best approach would be to take away the monetary incentive to post the articles here. If people still want to post an article for some other reason, then it would create more problems than it would solve to stop them.

I’d much rather see all links automatically posted as archive.is, with a link to the original in comments.

I’d say keep it around as comedy. That shape shifting article is hilarious!

Social media accounts, including Facebook accounts, and a few unverified Reddit account names, were included in the list before it was deleted.

That being said, you're excusing their behavior on a technicality.

Dude, the voting in this thread. Just, wow..

We have in the past but for the most part they just say something to the effect of:

We're looking into it and will take the proper action.

And nothing noticeable happens. If you want to shoot them a message by all means go for it.

The admins should maybe consider nerfing some of the power hungry mods on this site.

According to SouthPark I am in easy mode.

Lol you guys are a fucking joke.

doxxing only bad if it’s against a Reddit user for some reason: lmo

https://imgur.com/JqYTmjn

God damn, Ive stated this in many threads in this sub but never have I been downvoted this much. There has to be some sort of brigading going in. Because ussually this sub is something like 40/60 pro trump anti trump. Which is enough to get plenty of posts to the front page of the sub even if it's nowhere close to the reddit front page.

Satire isn't the only form of fake news, genius.

You are so full of shit. This is controlled opposition, and you are picking winners and losers based on your political bias and not any objective criterea.

It’s almost like CNN doesn’t follow Reddit’s rules

Finally,a rational comment.

i bet they'll take your complaint very seriously.

Infowars.com

Alex Jones 2024

Journalists "doxx" people all the time in their articles, it's a normal practice and has been for hundreds of years. This time, a CNN journalist decided not to publish a name as a fucking favor to the guy and ya'll flip out about it.

You’re flat out fucking lying.

Lol ok buddy. It's not that I've been conservative my whole life and we finally had a candidate that would say the shit that was needed to be said because most Republicans were spineless corporate shills.

Out of curiosity, who would you say is still making credible journalism?

Says the rando on reddit with zero credibility.

No offense, but who are you to pass judgement on them? Wtf have you done in your life that makes your opinion on their work matter at all? Anything? Anything published or peer reviewed?

No?

We thought so.

155 points is nothing in the Donald. You have never looked to see the activity. A top thread usually has many many 500+ posts

oh no where did u/dylan522p go? It seems his posts have vanished?